<?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 (10) TMI 33 - ITAT SURAT</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=428475</link>
    <description>The Tribunal condoned the delay in filing the appeal due to medical reasons and ruled the penalty imposed under section 271(1)(c) of the Income Tax Act, 1961, invalid. The penalty was deemed unsustainable as the assessing officer failed to specify the charge clearly and provided differing reasons. Consequently, the appeal was allowed in favor of the assessee, and the penalty was set aside.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Thu, 29 Sep 2022 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Fri, 30 Sep 2022 18:40:00 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=692351" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2022 (10) TMI 33 - ITAT SURAT</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=428475</link>
      <description>The Tribunal condoned the delay in filing the appeal due to medical reasons and ruled the penalty imposed under section 271(1)(c) of the Income Tax Act, 1961, invalid. The penalty was deemed unsustainable as the assessing officer failed to specify the charge clearly and provided differing reasons. Consequently, the appeal was allowed in favor of the assessee, and the penalty was set aside.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Income Tax</law>
      <pubDate>Thu, 29 Sep 2022 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=428475</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>