<?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>1990 (10) TMI 21 - PATNA High Court</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=22349</link>
    <description>Penalty for concealment under section 271(1)(c) cannot be sustained merely because a deduction claim is disallowed. The Tribunal found, on the material on record, that the assessee&#039;s claim for deduction of interest on loans did not amount to concealment of income, and that rejection of the claim alone was insufficient to justify penalty. On that basis, the cancellation of penalty was upheld and the reference was answered against the Revenue.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Wed, 17 Oct 1990 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Wed, 09 Dec 2009 13:59:36 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=61348" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>1990 (10) TMI 21 - PATNA High Court</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=22349</link>
      <description>Penalty for concealment under section 271(1)(c) cannot be sustained merely because a deduction claim is disallowed. The Tribunal found, on the material on record, that the assessee&#039;s claim for deduction of interest on loans did not amount to concealment of income, and that rejection of the claim alone was insufficient to justify penalty. On that basis, the cancellation of penalty was upheld and the reference was answered against the Revenue.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Income Tax</law>
      <pubDate>Wed, 17 Oct 1990 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=22349</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>