<?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>1982 (1) TMI 23 - MADRAS High Court</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=29093</link>
    <description>The High Court upheld the Tribunal&#039;s decision, ruling in favor of the assessee, finding that the penalty under s. 271(1)(c) of the I.T. Act was not justified due to the lack of evidence of concealment or fraud. The Court rejected the Department&#039;s challenge and ordered them to pay the assessee&#039;s costs.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Wed, 06 Jan 1982 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Wed, 10 Mar 2010 17:12:18 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=68090" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>1982 (1) TMI 23 - MADRAS High Court</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=29093</link>
      <description>The High Court upheld the Tribunal&#039;s decision, ruling in favor of the assessee, finding that the penalty under s. 271(1)(c) of the I.T. Act was not justified due to the lack of evidence of concealment or fraud. The Court rejected the Department&#039;s challenge and ordered them to pay the assessee&#039;s costs.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Income Tax</law>
      <pubDate>Wed, 06 Jan 1982 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=29093</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>