<?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 (5) TMI 623 - ITAT DELHI</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=379895</link>
    <description>The ITAT set aside the CIT(A)&#039;s penalty order imposed under Section 271(1)(c) of the Income Tax Act, 1961, due to the deficiency in the penalty notice specifying the relevant provisions. Relying on precedents and the principle of favorability to the assessee, the ITAT canceled the penalty, emphasizing the importance of clear communication in penalty notices for the validity of penalties.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Mon, 06 May 2019 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Thu, 09 May 2019 06:30:29 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=570432" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2019 (5) TMI 623 - ITAT DELHI</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=379895</link>
      <description>The ITAT set aside the CIT(A)&#039;s penalty order imposed under Section 271(1)(c) of the Income Tax Act, 1961, due to the deficiency in the penalty notice specifying the relevant provisions. Relying on precedents and the principle of favorability to the assessee, the ITAT canceled the penalty, emphasizing the importance of clear communication in penalty notices for the validity of penalties.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Income Tax</law>
      <pubDate>Mon, 06 May 2019 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=379895</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>