<?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 (6) TMI 1113 - ITAT CHENNAI</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=424272</link>
    <description>The Tribunal allowed the appeals filed by the assessees, deleting the penalties levied under Section 271AAB of the Income Tax Act, 1961. The Tribunal held that the minor discrepancy in the jewellery found could not attract a penalty, and concluded that the penalty provisions under Section 271AAB are discretionary, not mandatory. The penalties levied by the Assessing Officer and confirmed by the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) were deleted.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Wed, 22 Jun 2022 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Sat, 25 Jun 2022 09:20:28 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=683133" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2022 (6) TMI 1113 - ITAT CHENNAI</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=424272</link>
      <description>The Tribunal allowed the appeals filed by the assessees, deleting the penalties levied under Section 271AAB of the Income Tax Act, 1961. The Tribunal held that the minor discrepancy in the jewellery found could not attract a penalty, and concluded that the penalty provisions under Section 271AAB are discretionary, not mandatory. The penalties levied by the Assessing Officer and confirmed by the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) were deleted.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Income Tax</law>
      <pubDate>Wed, 22 Jun 2022 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=424272</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>