<?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 (3) TMI 88 - ITAT KOLKATA</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=376067</link>
    <description>The Tribunal allowed the appeal of the assessee, canceling the penalty imposed under section 271(1)(c) of the Income Tax Act, 1961, due to the defective notice issued by the Assessing Officer. The Tribunal found that the notice did not clearly specify the charge against the assessee, following a decision by a Coordinate Bench. Consequently, the imposition of the penalty was deemed unsustainable, leading to its cancellation.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Wed, 27 Feb 2019 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Sat, 02 Mar 2019 13:08:00 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=560861" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2019 (3) TMI 88 - ITAT KOLKATA</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=376067</link>
      <description>The Tribunal allowed the appeal of the assessee, canceling the penalty imposed under section 271(1)(c) of the Income Tax Act, 1961, due to the defective notice issued by the Assessing Officer. The Tribunal found that the notice did not clearly specify the charge against the assessee, following a decision by a Coordinate Bench. Consequently, the imposition of the penalty was deemed unsustainable, leading to its cancellation.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Income Tax</law>
      <pubDate>Wed, 27 Feb 2019 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=376067</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>