<?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 (12) TMI 25 - ITAT CHENNAI</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=430908</link>
    <description>The ITAT allowed the appeals, deleting the penalty under Section 271(1)(c) for both assessment years. The Tribunal found the classification of interest income as capital or revenue to be debatable, with the assessee making full disclosures, leading to the penalty&#039;s removal. The AO&#039;s initial penalty was reduced by the CIT(A) due to the issue&#039;s debatable nature, ultimately resulting in the ITAT deleting the penalty for both years.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Mon, 21 Nov 2022 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Thu, 01 Dec 2022 07:05:00 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=697343" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2022 (12) TMI 25 - ITAT CHENNAI</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=430908</link>
      <description>The ITAT allowed the appeals, deleting the penalty under Section 271(1)(c) for both assessment years. The Tribunal found the classification of interest income as capital or revenue to be debatable, with the assessee making full disclosures, leading to the penalty&#039;s removal. The AO&#039;s initial penalty was reduced by the CIT(A) due to the issue&#039;s debatable nature, ultimately resulting in the ITAT deleting the penalty for both years.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Income Tax</law>
      <pubDate>Mon, 21 Nov 2022 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=430908</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>