<?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>2010 (5) TMI 942 - ITAT MUMBAI</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=289766</link>
    <description>The Tribunal upheld the penalty under section 271(1)(c) of the Income-tax Act, 1961 against the assessee for concealing income and furnishing inaccurate particulars related to capital gains from the sale of land. The Tribunal found that the assessee&#039;s actions were not bona fide, as there was a significant transaction that was not properly disclosed in the returns. The appeal was dismissed, affirming the penalty imposed by the Assessing Officer and upheld by the CIT(A).</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Mon, 31 May 2010 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Thu, 20 Aug 2020 18:15:02 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=620134" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2010 (5) TMI 942 - ITAT MUMBAI</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=289766</link>
      <description>The Tribunal upheld the penalty under section 271(1)(c) of the Income-tax Act, 1961 against the assessee for concealing income and furnishing inaccurate particulars related to capital gains from the sale of land. The Tribunal found that the assessee&#039;s actions were not bona fide, as there was a significant transaction that was not properly disclosed in the returns. The appeal was dismissed, affirming the penalty imposed by the Assessing Officer and upheld by the CIT(A).</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Income Tax</law>
      <pubDate>Mon, 31 May 2010 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=289766</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>