<?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>2020 (2) TMI 934 - ITAT VISAKHAPATNAM</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=392490</link>
    <description>The Tribunal found the penalty notice invalid as it did not specify whether the penalty was for concealment of income or furnishing inaccurate particulars. Relying on legal principles and precedents, including a Supreme Court judgment and decisions from the High Court, the Tribunal canceled the penalty order, allowing the appeal filed by the assessee.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Mon, 17 Feb 2020 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Fri, 21 Feb 2020 12:40:26 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=604700" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2020 (2) TMI 934 - ITAT VISAKHAPATNAM</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=392490</link>
      <description>The Tribunal found the penalty notice invalid as it did not specify whether the penalty was for concealment of income or furnishing inaccurate particulars. Relying on legal principles and precedents, including a Supreme Court judgment and decisions from the High Court, the Tribunal canceled the penalty order, allowing the appeal filed by the assessee.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Income Tax</law>
      <pubDate>Mon, 17 Feb 2020 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=392490</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>