<?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>2017 (10) TMI 1418 - ITAT PUNE</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=278474</link>
    <description>The Tribunal set aside the penalties under Section 271(1)(c) for the assessment years 2007-08 and 2008-09 due to ambiguity in the Assessing Officer&#039;s charges. For the assessment year 2009-10, the Tribunal ruled that the penalty under Section 271(1)(c) was not applicable, emphasizing that penalties should be levied under Section 271AAA in cases where a search is initiated after a specified date.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Tue, 31 Oct 2017 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Wed, 06 Feb 2019 07:17:16 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=556625" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2017 (10) TMI 1418 - ITAT PUNE</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=278474</link>
      <description>The Tribunal set aside the penalties under Section 271(1)(c) for the assessment years 2007-08 and 2008-09 due to ambiguity in the Assessing Officer&#039;s charges. For the assessment year 2009-10, the Tribunal ruled that the penalty under Section 271(1)(c) was not applicable, emphasizing that penalties should be levied under Section 271AAA in cases where a search is initiated after a specified date.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Income Tax</law>
      <pubDate>Tue, 31 Oct 2017 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=278474</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>