<?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 (6) TMI 788 - ITAT DELHI</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=381711</link>
    <description>The Tribunal held that the penalty under section 271(1)(c) was not sustainable due to the deletion of the addition of undisclosed income by the Tribunal in a previous case. The legal precedent established that when the basis for the penalty is eliminated, the penalty for concealment cannot be upheld. As a result, the penalty imposed on the appellant was canceled, and the appeal was allowed.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Thu, 13 Jun 2019 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Tue, 18 Jun 2019 05:49:45 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=575549" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2019 (6) TMI 788 - ITAT DELHI</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=381711</link>
      <description>The Tribunal held that the penalty under section 271(1)(c) was not sustainable due to the deletion of the addition of undisclosed income by the Tribunal in a previous case. The legal precedent established that when the basis for the penalty is eliminated, the penalty for concealment cannot be upheld. As a result, the penalty imposed on the appellant was canceled, and the appeal was allowed.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Income Tax</law>
      <pubDate>Thu, 13 Jun 2019 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=381711</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>