<?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 91 - ITAT HYDERABAD</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=376070</link>
    <description>The ITAT Hyderabad ruled in favor of the assessee, a company manufacturing Corrugated Boxes, in a case involving the violation of Section 269T of the Income Tax Act and the levy of a penalty under Section 271E. The ITAT accepted the assessee&#039;s argument of a bonafide belief for repayment in cash, finding the transactions genuine and not aimed at tax evasion. Consequently, the penalty of Rs. 12,18,059 under Section 271E was deleted, emphasizing the importance of bonafide belief and genuine transactions in tax matters.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Wed, 27 Feb 2019 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Sat, 02 Mar 2019 12:52:00 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=560864" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2019 (3) TMI 91 - ITAT HYDERABAD</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=376070</link>
      <description>The ITAT Hyderabad ruled in favor of the assessee, a company manufacturing Corrugated Boxes, in a case involving the violation of Section 269T of the Income Tax Act and the levy of a penalty under Section 271E. The ITAT accepted the assessee&#039;s argument of a bonafide belief for repayment in cash, finding the transactions genuine and not aimed at tax evasion. Consequently, the penalty of Rs. 12,18,059 under Section 271E was deleted, emphasizing the importance of bonafide belief and genuine transactions in tax matters.</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=376070</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>