<?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>2016 (2) TMI 1322 - ITAT KOLKATA</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=299596</link>
    <description>The tribunal found that the penalty proceedings under Section 271(1)(c) of the Income Tax Act were improperly initiated due to the lack of a specific charge. As a result, the imposition of the penalty was deemed unsustainable, leading to the cancellation of the penalty. The appeal by the assessee was allowed, emphasizing the importance of clear and specific charges in penalty proceedings to uphold principles of natural justice.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Tue, 02 Feb 2016 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Wed, 22 Dec 2021 07:49:06 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=664735" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2016 (2) TMI 1322 - ITAT KOLKATA</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=299596</link>
      <description>The tribunal found that the penalty proceedings under Section 271(1)(c) of the Income Tax Act were improperly initiated due to the lack of a specific charge. As a result, the imposition of the penalty was deemed unsustainable, leading to the cancellation of the penalty. The appeal by the assessee was allowed, emphasizing the importance of clear and specific charges in penalty proceedings to uphold principles of natural justice.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Income Tax</law>
      <pubDate>Tue, 02 Feb 2016 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=299596</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>