<?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>2022 (2) TMI 393 - ITAT DELHI</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=418142</link>
    <description>The ITAT Delhi allowed the appeal, setting aside the penalty imposed under section 271(1)(c) of the Income Tax Act for AY 2007-08. The ITAT emphasized the importance of specific charges in penalty notices and concluded that the penalty was unsustainable as it lacked specificity. The decision aligned with previous judgments and highlighted that penalties should be based on clear grounds to be valid under the Income Tax Act, 1961.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Tue, 08 Feb 2022 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Wed, 09 Feb 2022 05:45:11 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=669776" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2022 (2) TMI 393 - ITAT DELHI</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=418142</link>
      <description>The ITAT Delhi allowed the appeal, setting aside the penalty imposed under section 271(1)(c) of the Income Tax Act for AY 2007-08. The ITAT emphasized the importance of specific charges in penalty notices and concluded that the penalty was unsustainable as it lacked specificity. The decision aligned with previous judgments and highlighted that penalties should be based on clear grounds to be valid under the Income Tax Act, 1961.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Income Tax</law>
      <pubDate>Tue, 08 Feb 2022 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=418142</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>