<?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 (3) TMI 667 - ITAT JAIPUR</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=419629</link>
    <description>The Tribunal set aside the CIT(A)&#039;s decision and canceled the penalty of Rs. 3,87,000/- imposed under Section 271(1)(c) of the Income Tax Act, 1961 for the Assessment Year 2010-11. The Tribunal found that the penalty was not justified as the assessee had provided a credible explanation for the cash deposits, which the authorities failed to consider. The appeal was allowed, highlighting the importance of proper evaluation of evidence and adherence to principles of natural justice.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Fri, 11 Mar 2022 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Wed, 16 Mar 2022 10:18:17 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=673041" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2022 (3) TMI 667 - ITAT JAIPUR</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=419629</link>
      <description>The Tribunal set aside the CIT(A)&#039;s decision and canceled the penalty of Rs. 3,87,000/- imposed under Section 271(1)(c) of the Income Tax Act, 1961 for the Assessment Year 2010-11. The Tribunal found that the penalty was not justified as the assessee had provided a credible explanation for the cash deposits, which the authorities failed to consider. The appeal was allowed, highlighting the importance of proper evaluation of evidence and adherence to principles of natural justice.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Income Tax</law>
      <pubDate>Fri, 11 Mar 2022 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=419629</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>