<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?>
<?xml-stylesheet type="text/xsl" href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_sitemap/rss_feed_blog.xsl?v=1750492856"?>
<rss version="2.0" xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom">
  <channel>
    <title>2019 (1) TMI 1133 - ITAT CHANDIGARH</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=373968</link>
    <description>The ITAT Chandigarh allowed all three appeals filed by the assessee concerning penalties under different sections for the assessment years 2010-11 and 2011-12. The penalties under sections 271AAA and 271(1)(c) were deleted as the additions on which they were based were restored back to the AO and subsequently deleted in quantum proceedings, rendering the penalties unjustifiable. The ITAT emphasized the deletion of penalties due to the restoration of additions, resulting in the favorable outcome for the assessee.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Fri, 18 Jan 2019 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Wed, 23 Jan 2019 07:38:45 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=554423" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2019 (1) TMI 1133 - ITAT CHANDIGARH</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=373968</link>
      <description>The ITAT Chandigarh allowed all three appeals filed by the assessee concerning penalties under different sections for the assessment years 2010-11 and 2011-12. The penalties under sections 271AAA and 271(1)(c) were deleted as the additions on which they were based were restored back to the AO and subsequently deleted in quantum proceedings, rendering the penalties unjustifiable. The ITAT emphasized the deletion of penalties due to the restoration of additions, resulting in the favorable outcome for the assessee.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Income Tax</law>
      <pubDate>Fri, 18 Jan 2019 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=373968</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>