<?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 776 - ITAT DELHI</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=401021</link>
    <description>The Tribunal allowed the appeal against the penalty order under section 271(1)(c) of the Income-tax Act, 1961 for the assessment year 2012-13. It was held that the penalty proceedings were flawed due to vague and ambiguous notices, which did not clearly specify the charges under which the penalty was initiated. The Tribunal emphasized the importance of clear notice requirements and found the penalty unsustainable in law. Consequently, the penalty imposed on the assessee was set aside.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Tue, 24 Nov 2020 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Wed, 25 Nov 2020 10:23:39 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=628566" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2020 (11) TMI 776 - ITAT DELHI</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=401021</link>
      <description>The Tribunal allowed the appeal against the penalty order under section 271(1)(c) of the Income-tax Act, 1961 for the assessment year 2012-13. It was held that the penalty proceedings were flawed due to vague and ambiguous notices, which did not clearly specify the charges under which the penalty was initiated. The Tribunal emphasized the importance of clear notice requirements and found the penalty unsustainable in law. Consequently, the penalty imposed on the assessee was set aside.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Income Tax</law>
      <pubDate>Tue, 24 Nov 2020 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=401021</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>