<?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 1076 - ITAT KOLKATA</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=420038</link>
    <description>The Tribunal allowed the appeal, setting aside the penalty of Rs. 4 lakhs imposed under Section 271AAA of the Income Tax Act. It held that the assessee had met all conditions under Section 271AAA(2) for the disclosed amount but the additional Rs. 40 lakhs, offered as a conditional cover without specific evidence, did not constitute &quot;undisclosed income.&quot; Therefore, the penalty was deemed legally unsustainable, and the appeal was successful.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Wed, 23 Mar 2022 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Fri, 25 Mar 2022 08:36:03 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=673843" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2022 (3) TMI 1076 - ITAT KOLKATA</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=420038</link>
      <description>The Tribunal allowed the appeal, setting aside the penalty of Rs. 4 lakhs imposed under Section 271AAA of the Income Tax Act. It held that the assessee had met all conditions under Section 271AAA(2) for the disclosed amount but the additional Rs. 40 lakhs, offered as a conditional cover without specific evidence, did not constitute &quot;undisclosed income.&quot; Therefore, the penalty was deemed legally unsustainable, and the appeal was successful.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Income Tax</law>
      <pubDate>Wed, 23 Mar 2022 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=420038</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>