<?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 (11) TMI 272 - ITAT AHMEDABAD</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=400517</link>
    <description>The Tribunal found that the penalty imposed on the assessee under section 271(1)(c) of the Income Tax Act, 1961 for disallowance of interest expenses was not justified as there was no dishonest or malafide conduct. It concluded that the penalty was not maintainable in the absence of concealment of facts, directing the Assessing Officer to delete the penalty. As a result, the appeal of the assessee was allowed ex parte.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Mon, 12 Oct 2020 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Mon, 09 Nov 2020 17:12:22 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=627327" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2020 (11) TMI 272 - ITAT AHMEDABAD</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=400517</link>
      <description>The Tribunal found that the penalty imposed on the assessee under section 271(1)(c) of the Income Tax Act, 1961 for disallowance of interest expenses was not justified as there was no dishonest or malafide conduct. It concluded that the penalty was not maintainable in the absence of concealment of facts, directing the Assessing Officer to delete the penalty. As a result, the appeal of the assessee was allowed ex parte.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Income Tax</law>
      <pubDate>Mon, 12 Oct 2020 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=400517</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>