<?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 (9) TMI 380 - ITAT SURAT</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=442758</link>
    <description>The Tribunal ruled in favor of the assessee, finding that the penalty of Rs. 65,050/- under section 271(1)(c) of the Income Tax Act was unjustified due to lack of clarity in the penalty order and the deletion of the employer&#039;s penalty. The Tribunal held that since the penalty on the employer had been deleted, the penalty on the employee should also be deleted. As a result, the penalty was removed, and the assessee&#039;s appeal was allowed.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Mon, 04 Sep 2023 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Sat, 09 Sep 2023 09:37:21 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=725533" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2023 (9) TMI 380 - ITAT SURAT</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=442758</link>
      <description>The Tribunal ruled in favor of the assessee, finding that the penalty of Rs. 65,050/- under section 271(1)(c) of the Income Tax Act was unjustified due to lack of clarity in the penalty order and the deletion of the employer&#039;s penalty. The Tribunal held that since the penalty on the employer had been deleted, the penalty on the employee should also be deleted. As a result, the penalty was removed, and the assessee&#039;s appeal was allowed.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Income Tax</law>
      <pubDate>Mon, 04 Sep 2023 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=442758</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>