<?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 865 - ITAT DELHI</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=393721</link>
    <description>The Tribunal allowed all three appeals, canceling the penalties imposed under section 271(1)(c) for the assessment years in question. The decision was based on the failure to specify the grounds for penalty in the notices issued, in line with legal precedents. The Tribunal&#039;s ruling emphasized the importance of clarity in specifying the nature of charges when initiating penalty proceedings.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Thu, 30 Jan 2020 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Sat, 21 Mar 2020 12:15:35 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=607637" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2020 (3) TMI 865 - ITAT DELHI</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=393721</link>
      <description>The Tribunal allowed all three appeals, canceling the penalties imposed under section 271(1)(c) for the assessment years in question. The decision was based on the failure to specify the grounds for penalty in the notices issued, in line with legal precedents. The Tribunal&#039;s ruling emphasized the importance of clarity in specifying the nature of charges when initiating penalty proceedings.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Income Tax</law>
      <pubDate>Thu, 30 Jan 2020 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=393721</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>