<?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>2021 (1) TMI 398 - ITAT SURAT</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=402806</link>
    <description>The Tribunal confirmed the penalty under section 271(1)(c) of the Income Tax Act based on findings in quantum proceedings, rejecting the assessee&#039;s argument that penalty should not be solely based on quantum findings. The Tribunal emphasized that its power to rectify orders was limited to correcting apparent mistakes and not to review legal interpretations or factual findings, leading to the dismissal of the assessee&#039;s application challenging the penalty confirmation.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Fri, 18 Dec 2020 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Wed, 13 Jan 2021 11:41:39 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=632839" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2021 (1) TMI 398 - ITAT SURAT</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=402806</link>
      <description>The Tribunal confirmed the penalty under section 271(1)(c) of the Income Tax Act based on findings in quantum proceedings, rejecting the assessee&#039;s argument that penalty should not be solely based on quantum findings. The Tribunal emphasized that its power to rectify orders was limited to correcting apparent mistakes and not to review legal interpretations or factual findings, leading to the dismissal of the assessee&#039;s application challenging the penalty confirmation.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Income Tax</law>
      <pubDate>Fri, 18 Dec 2020 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=402806</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>