<?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 (3) TMI 1756 - ITAT MUMBAI</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=287136</link>
    <description>The Appellate Tribunal ITAT Mumbai addressed a jurisdictional issue regarding the validity of penalty proceedings under section 271(1)(c) and a merits issue related to the levy of penalty for alleged bogus purchases. The Tribunal found that the penalty proceedings lacked clarity on the charge for which the penalty was imposed. Following the decision of the Hon&#039;ble Bombay High Court, the Tribunal allowed the appeal of the assessee by deleting the penalty.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Tue, 05 Mar 2019 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Tue, 31 Mar 2020 12:11:55 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=608730" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2019 (3) TMI 1756 - ITAT MUMBAI</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=287136</link>
      <description>The Appellate Tribunal ITAT Mumbai addressed a jurisdictional issue regarding the validity of penalty proceedings under section 271(1)(c) and a merits issue related to the levy of penalty for alleged bogus purchases. The Tribunal found that the penalty proceedings lacked clarity on the charge for which the penalty was imposed. Following the decision of the Hon&#039;ble Bombay High Court, the Tribunal allowed the appeal of the assessee by deleting the penalty.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Income Tax</law>
      <pubDate>Tue, 05 Mar 2019 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=287136</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>