<?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 (8) TMI 845 - ITAT DELHI</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=384656</link>
    <description>The Tribunal set aside the penalty imposed under section 271(1)(c) of the Income Tax Act, ruling that the assessee had not furnished inaccurate particulars of income. The penalty was deemed unjustified as the disallowance differences were variations in estimates, not inaccuracies. The Tribunal emphasized the importance of adhering to guidelines and providing accurate income particulars, leading to the cancellation of the penalty.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Fri, 09 Aug 2019 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Mon, 19 Aug 2019 13:23:00 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=584083" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2019 (8) TMI 845 - ITAT DELHI</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=384656</link>
      <description>The Tribunal set aside the penalty imposed under section 271(1)(c) of the Income Tax Act, ruling that the assessee had not furnished inaccurate particulars of income. The penalty was deemed unjustified as the disallowance differences were variations in estimates, not inaccuracies. The Tribunal emphasized the importance of adhering to guidelines and providing accurate income particulars, leading to the cancellation of the penalty.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Income Tax</law>
      <pubDate>Fri, 09 Aug 2019 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=384656</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>