<?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 (5) TMI 50 - ITAT BANGALORE</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=395017</link>
    <description>The Tribunal upheld the CIT(A)&#039;s decision to delete the penalty under section 271(1)(c) for concealment of income and disallowance of interest expenditure deduction. The Tribunal emphasized the lack of intentional concealment by the assessee, noting the voluntary disclosure of errors and insufficient proof for disallowance. The Revenue&#039;s appeal was dismissed, affirming the ruling in favor of the assessee.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Fri, 28 Feb 2020 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Wed, 06 May 2020 09:37:00 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=611966" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2020 (5) TMI 50 - ITAT BANGALORE</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=395017</link>
      <description>The Tribunal upheld the CIT(A)&#039;s decision to delete the penalty under section 271(1)(c) for concealment of income and disallowance of interest expenditure deduction. The Tribunal emphasized the lack of intentional concealment by the assessee, noting the voluntary disclosure of errors and insufficient proof for disallowance. The Revenue&#039;s appeal was dismissed, affirming the ruling in favor of the assessee.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Income Tax</law>
      <pubDate>Fri, 28 Feb 2020 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=395017</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>