<?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 (7) TMI 1520 - ITAT DELHI</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=280920</link>
    <description>The Tribunal dismissed the revenue&#039;s appeal, upholding that the penalty order dated 19.05.2011 was barred by limitation under section 158BFA(3)(c) of the Income Tax Act. The decision was based on the clear interpretation of the law and the absence of any contradictory judicial precedents. The Tribunal emphasized the importance of adhering to statutory provisions regarding penalties, highlighting the significance of timelines and limitations in penalty proceedings.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Fri, 01 Jul 2016 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Sun, 26 May 2019 14:42:32 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=572727" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2016 (7) TMI 1520 - ITAT DELHI</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=280920</link>
      <description>The Tribunal dismissed the revenue&#039;s appeal, upholding that the penalty order dated 19.05.2011 was barred by limitation under section 158BFA(3)(c) of the Income Tax Act. The decision was based on the clear interpretation of the law and the absence of any contradictory judicial precedents. The Tribunal emphasized the importance of adhering to statutory provisions regarding penalties, highlighting the significance of timelines and limitations in penalty proceedings.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Income Tax</law>
      <pubDate>Fri, 01 Jul 2016 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=280920</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>