<?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 830 - ITAT MUMBAI</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=443208</link>
    <description>The Tribunal set aside the penalty levied under Section 271(1)(c) of the Income Tax Act for the assessment year 2011-12. The penalty was related to disallowances made under Sections 10A, 40(a)(ia), and 37(1) of the Act. The Tribunal held that the disallowances did not amount to furnishing inaccurate particulars of income and were debatable issues. Consequently, the Tribunal directed the Assessing Officer to delete the penalty, citing relevant case law to support its decision.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Wed, 10 May 2023 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Mon, 18 Sep 2023 18:26:00 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=726468" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2023 (9) TMI 830 - ITAT MUMBAI</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=443208</link>
      <description>The Tribunal set aside the penalty levied under Section 271(1)(c) of the Income Tax Act for the assessment year 2011-12. The penalty was related to disallowances made under Sections 10A, 40(a)(ia), and 37(1) of the Act. The Tribunal held that the disallowances did not amount to furnishing inaccurate particulars of income and were debatable issues. Consequently, the Tribunal directed the Assessing Officer to delete the penalty, citing relevant case law to support its decision.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Income Tax</law>
      <pubDate>Wed, 10 May 2023 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=443208</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>