<?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>2016 (9) TMI 1509 - ITAT MUMBAI</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=280876</link>
    <description>The tribunal dismissed the assessee&#039;s appeal, upholding the penalty under section 271(1)(c) of the Income Tax Act. The tribunal found no merit in the arguments regarding the defective notice, the need for separate initiation of penalty proceedings, and the claim of voluntary disclosure. The tribunal emphasized the clear and unrebutted findings of the AO, leading to the inference of the credits being the assessee&#039;s own money and thus justifying the penalty.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Mon, 19 Sep 2016 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Fri, 24 May 2019 12:10:32 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=572540" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2016 (9) TMI 1509 - ITAT MUMBAI</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=280876</link>
      <description>The tribunal dismissed the assessee&#039;s appeal, upholding the penalty under section 271(1)(c) of the Income Tax Act. The tribunal found no merit in the arguments regarding the defective notice, the need for separate initiation of penalty proceedings, and the claim of voluntary disclosure. The tribunal emphasized the clear and unrebutted findings of the AO, leading to the inference of the credits being the assessee&#039;s own money and thus justifying the penalty.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Income Tax</law>
      <pubDate>Mon, 19 Sep 2016 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=280876</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>