<?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 654 - ITAT MUMBAI</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=408758</link>
    <description>The Tribunal dismissed the Revenue&#039;s appeal, affirming the deletion of the penalty under section 271(1)(c) by the learned Commissioner (Appeals). The judgment emphasized the need for concrete evidence to establish concealment of income or furnishing inaccurate particulars for penalty imposition, particularly when additions are made on an estimate basis without substantiated proof.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Thu, 10 Jun 2021 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Mon, 21 Jun 2021 09:34:06 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=647338" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2021 (6) TMI 654 - ITAT MUMBAI</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=408758</link>
      <description>The Tribunal dismissed the Revenue&#039;s appeal, affirming the deletion of the penalty under section 271(1)(c) by the learned Commissioner (Appeals). The judgment emphasized the need for concrete evidence to establish concealment of income or furnishing inaccurate particulars for penalty imposition, particularly when additions are made on an estimate basis without substantiated proof.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Income Tax</law>
      <pubDate>Thu, 10 Jun 2021 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=408758</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>