<?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 (3) TMI 716 - ITAT KOLKATA</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=393572</link>
    <description>The Tribunal allowed the appeal, deleting the penalty of Rs. 5,80,000 imposed under Section 271E. The judgment emphasized that penalties should not be imposed for genuine transactions where the identities of the parties are known, and there is no intention to evade tax. The decision highlighted the significance of considering legislative intent and the presence of a reasonable cause before imposing penalties under the Income Tax Act.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Mon, 16 Mar 2020 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Thu, 19 Mar 2020 11:11:53 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=607309" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2020 (3) TMI 716 - ITAT KOLKATA</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=393572</link>
      <description>The Tribunal allowed the appeal, deleting the penalty of Rs. 5,80,000 imposed under Section 271E. The judgment emphasized that penalties should not be imposed for genuine transactions where the identities of the parties are known, and there is no intention to evade tax. The decision highlighted the significance of considering legislative intent and the presence of a reasonable cause before imposing penalties under the Income Tax Act.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Income Tax</law>
      <pubDate>Mon, 16 Mar 2020 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=393572</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>