<?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 (10) TMI 282 - ITAT VISAKHAPATNAM</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=386798</link>
    <description>The Tribunal held that the penalty notice issued under section 271(1)(c) was invalid as it did not clearly specify whether it pertained to concealment of income or inaccurate particulars. Consequently, the penalty order was canceled, and all appeals filed by the assessee were allowed. The decision aligned with the High Court judgment and emphasized the necessity of clear and specific notices in penalty proceedings for fairness and adherence to legal principles.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Wed, 25 Sep 2019 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Wed, 09 Oct 2019 07:33:54 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=590107" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2019 (10) TMI 282 - ITAT VISAKHAPATNAM</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=386798</link>
      <description>The Tribunal held that the penalty notice issued under section 271(1)(c) was invalid as it did not clearly specify whether it pertained to concealment of income or inaccurate particulars. Consequently, the penalty order was canceled, and all appeals filed by the assessee were allowed. The decision aligned with the High Court judgment and emphasized the necessity of clear and specific notices in penalty proceedings for fairness and adherence to legal principles.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Income Tax</law>
      <pubDate>Wed, 25 Sep 2019 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=386798</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>