<?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 734 - ITAT PUNE</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=376713</link>
    <description>The Tribunal upheld the decision to delete the penalty imposed under section 271(1)(c) of the Income Tax Act on additional income disclosed during a survey operation. The Tribunal found that since the disclosed income was accepted in the assessment and there was no concealment or furnishing of inaccurate particulars, the penalty was not justified. The Tribunal referred to a similar case where the penalty on additional income from the same survey was deleted, supporting the decision to dismiss the Revenue&#039;s appeal.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Fri, 08 Mar 2019 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Thu, 14 Mar 2019 18:18:00 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=562900" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2019 (3) TMI 734 - ITAT PUNE</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=376713</link>
      <description>The Tribunal upheld the decision to delete the penalty imposed under section 271(1)(c) of the Income Tax Act on additional income disclosed during a survey operation. The Tribunal found that since the disclosed income was accepted in the assessment and there was no concealment or furnishing of inaccurate particulars, the penalty was not justified. The Tribunal referred to a similar case where the penalty on additional income from the same survey was deleted, supporting the decision to dismiss the Revenue&#039;s appeal.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Income Tax</law>
      <pubDate>Fri, 08 Mar 2019 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=376713</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>