<?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 (9) TMI 629 - ITAT CHENNAI</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=385861</link>
    <description>The Tribunal upheld the penalty levied under Section 271(1)(c) by the Assessing Officer, dismissing the appeal and affirming the CIT(A)&#039;s decision. It clarified that the disclosed income, not part of regular accounts, warranted the penalty. The Tribunal emphasized the CIT(A) lacked authority to direct penalty under Section 271AAA when conditions were not met. The appeal was dismissed, and the penalty sustained.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Tue, 10 Sep 2019 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Mon, 16 Sep 2019 11:12:16 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=587349" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2019 (9) TMI 629 - ITAT CHENNAI</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=385861</link>
      <description>The Tribunal upheld the penalty levied under Section 271(1)(c) by the Assessing Officer, dismissing the appeal and affirming the CIT(A)&#039;s decision. It clarified that the disclosed income, not part of regular accounts, warranted the penalty. The Tribunal emphasized the CIT(A) lacked authority to direct penalty under Section 271AAA when conditions were not met. The appeal was dismissed, and the penalty sustained.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Income Tax</law>
      <pubDate>Tue, 10 Sep 2019 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=385861</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>