<?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 (4) TMI 463 - ITAT MUMBAI</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=394556</link>
    <description>The Tribunal allowed the appeal and deleted the penalty imposed under Section 271(1)(c) of the Act. It found that the penalty was unjustified as the disallowed expenses and excess loss claimed were not due to inaccurate particulars or concealment of income but were genuine errors. The Tribunal concluded that there was no evidence of deliberate wrongdoing by the assessee, leading to the removal of the penalty amount.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Wed, 05 Feb 2020 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Thu, 16 Apr 2020 13:02:31 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=610400" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2020 (4) TMI 463 - ITAT MUMBAI</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=394556</link>
      <description>The Tribunal allowed the appeal and deleted the penalty imposed under Section 271(1)(c) of the Act. It found that the penalty was unjustified as the disallowed expenses and excess loss claimed were not due to inaccurate particulars or concealment of income but were genuine errors. The Tribunal concluded that there was no evidence of deliberate wrongdoing by the assessee, leading to the removal of the penalty amount.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Income Tax</law>
      <pubDate>Wed, 05 Feb 2020 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=394556</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>