<?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 (6) TMI 128 - ITAT SURAT</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=408232</link>
    <description>The ITAT Surat ruled in favor of the assessee, setting aside the penalty imposed under section 271(1)(c) due to inconsistencies in the charge of penalty between the assessment order and the penalty order. The judgment highlighted the necessity for clarity and specificity in specifying the grounds for penalty imposition to ensure the validity and sustainability of such penalties.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Thu, 13 May 2021 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Fri, 04 Jun 2021 08:25:13 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=645929" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2021 (6) TMI 128 - ITAT SURAT</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=408232</link>
      <description>The ITAT Surat ruled in favor of the assessee, setting aside the penalty imposed under section 271(1)(c) due to inconsistencies in the charge of penalty between the assessment order and the penalty order. The judgment highlighted the necessity for clarity and specificity in specifying the grounds for penalty imposition to ensure the validity and sustainability of such penalties.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Income Tax</law>
      <pubDate>Thu, 13 May 2021 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=408232</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>