<?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 (8) TMI 1443 - ITAT MUMBAI</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=284921</link>
    <description>The tribunal allowed the appeal, directing the deletion of the entire penalty under section 272A(2)(c) of the Income Tax Act. The appellant&#039;s consistent denial of ownership of the bank account and compliance with notices were considered reasonable cause for non-compliance. The tribunal emphasized the importance of proper authentication of documents and found the penalty unjustified due to the lack of admissible evidence. The decision was pronounced on 30/08/2019.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Fri, 30 Aug 2019 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Tue, 17 Dec 2019 09:39:30 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=597451" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2019 (8) TMI 1443 - ITAT MUMBAI</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=284921</link>
      <description>The tribunal allowed the appeal, directing the deletion of the entire penalty under section 272A(2)(c) of the Income Tax Act. The appellant&#039;s consistent denial of ownership of the bank account and compliance with notices were considered reasonable cause for non-compliance. The tribunal emphasized the importance of proper authentication of documents and found the penalty unjustified due to the lack of admissible evidence. The decision was pronounced on 30/08/2019.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Income Tax</law>
      <pubDate>Fri, 30 Aug 2019 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=284921</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>