<?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>2023 (8) TMI 962 - ITAT RAIPUR</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=441983</link>
    <description>The ITAT held that the penalty imposed under Section 271(1)(c) was unsustainable due to the Assessing Officer&#039;s failure to specify the exact default in the Show Cause Notices. As a result, the penalty of Rs. 1,53,000/- was quashed, and the appeal of the assessee was allowed. The ITAT did not address other grounds of appeal, as the penalty was overturned on jurisdictional grounds.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Fri, 18 Aug 2023 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Tue, 22 Aug 2023 09:11:59 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=723294" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2023 (8) TMI 962 - ITAT RAIPUR</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=441983</link>
      <description>The ITAT held that the penalty imposed under Section 271(1)(c) was unsustainable due to the Assessing Officer&#039;s failure to specify the exact default in the Show Cause Notices. As a result, the penalty of Rs. 1,53,000/- was quashed, and the appeal of the assessee was allowed. The ITAT did not address other grounds of appeal, as the penalty was overturned on jurisdictional grounds.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Income Tax</law>
      <pubDate>Fri, 18 Aug 2023 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=441983</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>