<?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>2010 (5) TMI 945 - DELHI HIGH COURT</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=294163</link>
    <description>Deletion of penalty under Section 271(1)(c) of the Income-tax Act was examined in relation to two disputed expense items, with the legal question framed as whether the Tribunal&#039;s decision was perverse. The matter was heard on that issue, but the court reserved orders and did not render a final adjudication in the text provided.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Mon, 17 May 2010 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Wed, 24 Mar 2021 10:11:02 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=639743" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2010 (5) TMI 945 - DELHI HIGH COURT</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=294163</link>
      <description>Deletion of penalty under Section 271(1)(c) of the Income-tax Act was examined in relation to two disputed expense items, with the legal question framed as whether the Tribunal&#039;s decision was perverse. The matter was heard on that issue, but the court reserved orders and did not render a final adjudication in the text provided.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Income Tax</law>
      <pubDate>Mon, 17 May 2010 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=294163</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>