<?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 1460 - ITAT DELHI</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=377439</link>
    <description>The Tribunal allowed the appeal of the assessee, cancelling the penalty imposed under section 271(1)(c) for lack of specificity in the penalty notice, following the principle of resolving doubts in favor of the taxpayer. The Revenue&#039;s appeal was dismissed, emphasizing the importance of clear and specific charges in penalty notices to uphold the validity of penalty proceedings.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Wed, 27 Mar 2019 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Fri, 29 Mar 2019 09:01:21 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=564623" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2019 (3) TMI 1460 - ITAT DELHI</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=377439</link>
      <description>The Tribunal allowed the appeal of the assessee, cancelling the penalty imposed under section 271(1)(c) for lack of specificity in the penalty notice, following the principle of resolving doubts in favor of the taxpayer. The Revenue&#039;s appeal was dismissed, emphasizing the importance of clear and specific charges in penalty notices to uphold the validity of penalty proceedings.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Income Tax</law>
      <pubDate>Wed, 27 Mar 2019 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=377439</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>