<?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 (12) TMI 617 - ITAT BANGALORE</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=389734</link>
    <description>The ITAT set aside the penalty imposed under section 271B for not furnishing the tax audit report on time, citing the appellant&#039;s belief that the report could be filed by a later date and the report being available to the assessing officer before assessment completion. The ITAT emphasized the technical nature of the delay, stating it did not result in any financial loss to the revenue, and directed the AO to delete the penalty for the year in question.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Fri, 13 Dec 2019 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Mon, 16 Dec 2019 09:49:17 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=597385" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2019 (12) TMI 617 - ITAT BANGALORE</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=389734</link>
      <description>The ITAT set aside the penalty imposed under section 271B for not furnishing the tax audit report on time, citing the appellant&#039;s belief that the report could be filed by a later date and the report being available to the assessing officer before assessment completion. The ITAT emphasized the technical nature of the delay, stating it did not result in any financial loss to the revenue, and directed the AO to delete the penalty for the year in question.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Income Tax</law>
      <pubDate>Fri, 13 Dec 2019 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=389734</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>