<?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 (11) TMI 97 - ITAT INDORE</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=387848</link>
    <description>The ITAT allowed the appeal, determining that the penalty under Section 271B was unjustified. The Tribunal concluded that the turnover declared by the assessee did not exceed the threshold under Section 44AB, and unaccounted turnover discovered during assessment should not be included for audit requirements. Consequently, the penalty was deleted, and the CIT(A)&#039;s order was set aside.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Thu, 31 Oct 2019 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Fri, 08 Nov 2024 13:26:00 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=592772" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2019 (11) TMI 97 - ITAT INDORE</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=387848</link>
      <description>The ITAT allowed the appeal, determining that the penalty under Section 271B was unjustified. The Tribunal concluded that the turnover declared by the assessee did not exceed the threshold under Section 44AB, and unaccounted turnover discovered during assessment should not be included for audit requirements. Consequently, the penalty was deleted, and the CIT(A)&#039;s order was set aside.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Income Tax</law>
      <pubDate>Thu, 31 Oct 2019 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=387848</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>