<?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 829 - ITAT DELHI</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=378385</link>
    <description>The Tribunal allowed the appeal, canceling the penalty of Rs. 5,32,511 imposed under section 271(1)(c) of the Income Tax Act. The decision was based on the inadequacy of the penalty notice in specifying the grounds for penalty imposition, following legal principles requiring clarity and specificity in penalty notices. The Tribunal emphasized the importance of clear notices to enable proper response by the assessee, aligning with previous judicial interpretations.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Thu, 11 Apr 2019 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Sat, 13 Apr 2019 10:04:00 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=566915" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2019 (4) TMI 829 - ITAT DELHI</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=378385</link>
      <description>The Tribunal allowed the appeal, canceling the penalty of Rs. 5,32,511 imposed under section 271(1)(c) of the Income Tax Act. The decision was based on the inadequacy of the penalty notice in specifying the grounds for penalty imposition, following legal principles requiring clarity and specificity in penalty notices. The Tribunal emphasized the importance of clear notices to enable proper response by the assessee, aligning with previous judicial interpretations.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Income Tax</law>
      <pubDate>Thu, 11 Apr 2019 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=378385</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>