<?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 (12) TMI 497 - ITAT MUMBAI</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=401698</link>
    <description>The Tribunal upheld the penalty imposed on the assessee for non-compliance and lack of evidence, confirming the addition of unexplained cash credit under section 68. The decision emphasized the necessity of active participation and providing evidence in tax proceedings to avoid penalties for concealment of income or inaccurate particulars. The appeal challenging the penalty imposition was dismissed, affirming the justification of the penalty under section 271(1)(c) by both the Commissioner (Appeals) and the Tribunal.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Fri, 27 Nov 2020 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Tue, 15 Dec 2020 10:35:10 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=630226" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2020 (12) TMI 497 - ITAT MUMBAI</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=401698</link>
      <description>The Tribunal upheld the penalty imposed on the assessee for non-compliance and lack of evidence, confirming the addition of unexplained cash credit under section 68. The decision emphasized the necessity of active participation and providing evidence in tax proceedings to avoid penalties for concealment of income or inaccurate particulars. The appeal challenging the penalty imposition was dismissed, affirming the justification of the penalty under section 271(1)(c) by both the Commissioner (Appeals) and the Tribunal.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Income Tax</law>
      <pubDate>Fri, 27 Nov 2020 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=401698</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>