<?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 (4) TMI 507 - ITAT AHMEDABAD</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=378063</link>
    <description>The Tribunal dismissed the Revenue&#039;s appeal, ruling that the penalty imposed under normal provisions was not justified when the tax liability was determined under special provisions of Section 115JB of the Income Tax Act. The Tribunal found merit in the assessee&#039;s argument that no concealment could be established under s. 271(1)(c) in such circumstances. As a result, the penalty of Rs. 54,70,000 was directed to be deleted by the Assessing Officer.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Thu, 28 Feb 2019 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Sat, 06 Apr 2019 11:08:00 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=566050" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2019 (4) TMI 507 - ITAT AHMEDABAD</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=378063</link>
      <description>The Tribunal dismissed the Revenue&#039;s appeal, ruling that the penalty imposed under normal provisions was not justified when the tax liability was determined under special provisions of Section 115JB of the Income Tax Act. The Tribunal found merit in the assessee&#039;s argument that no concealment could be established under s. 271(1)(c) in such circumstances. As a result, the penalty of Rs. 54,70,000 was directed to be deleted by the Assessing Officer.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Income Tax</law>
      <pubDate>Thu, 28 Feb 2019 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=378063</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>