<?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 934 - ITAT CHANDIGARH</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=386166</link>
    <description>The tribunal partly allowed the appeal, concluding that the penalty for the income declared in the revised return was not leviable as it was validly filed within the prescribed period. However, the penalty for the difference in income received was confirmed due to concealment. The penalty for the latter was upheld at 100% of the tax amount sought to be evaded.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Mon, 01 Jul 2019 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Mon, 23 Sep 2019 07:38:00 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=588411" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2019 (9) TMI 934 - ITAT CHANDIGARH</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=386166</link>
      <description>The tribunal partly allowed the appeal, concluding that the penalty for the income declared in the revised return was not leviable as it was validly filed within the prescribed period. However, the penalty for the difference in income received was confirmed due to concealment. The penalty for the latter was upheld at 100% of the tax amount sought to be evaded.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Income Tax</law>
      <pubDate>Mon, 01 Jul 2019 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=386166</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>