<?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>2018 (4) TMI 1783 - ITAT CUTTACK</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=285839</link>
    <description>The ITAT set aside the CIT(A)&#039;s penalty order under Section 271D of the Income Tax Act, ruling in favor of the assessee. ITAT found the cash loans accepted were genuine, with no intent of tax evasion, supported by disclosures from the lenders. Emphasizing the genuineness of transactions and absence of malafide intent, ITAT overturned the penalty, citing relevant legal precedents.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Wed, 11 Apr 2018 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Wed, 29 Jan 2020 17:43:14 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=601803" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2018 (4) TMI 1783 - ITAT CUTTACK</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=285839</link>
      <description>The ITAT set aside the CIT(A)&#039;s penalty order under Section 271D of the Income Tax Act, ruling in favor of the assessee. ITAT found the cash loans accepted were genuine, with no intent of tax evasion, supported by disclosures from the lenders. Emphasizing the genuineness of transactions and absence of malafide intent, ITAT overturned the penalty, citing relevant legal precedents.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Income Tax</law>
      <pubDate>Wed, 11 Apr 2018 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=285839</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>