<?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 (3) TMI 99 - ITAT DELHI</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=404771</link>
    <description>The Tribunal allowed the assessee&#039;s appeal, setting aside the penalty under section 271(1)(c) due to the penalty notice&#039;s failure to specify whether the penalty was for concealment of income or furnishing inaccurate particulars. The lack of specificity in the notice rendered the penalty unsustainable, aligning with precedents requiring clear grounds for penalties.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Thu, 19 Nov 2020 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Tue, 29 Oct 2024 12:07:00 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=637935" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2021 (3) TMI 99 - ITAT DELHI</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=404771</link>
      <description>The Tribunal allowed the assessee&#039;s appeal, setting aside the penalty under section 271(1)(c) due to the penalty notice&#039;s failure to specify whether the penalty was for concealment of income or furnishing inaccurate particulars. The lack of specificity in the notice rendered the penalty unsustainable, aligning with precedents requiring clear grounds for penalties.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Income Tax</law>
      <pubDate>Thu, 19 Nov 2020 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=404771</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>