<?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>Tax Penalty Overturned Due to Ambiguity in Charges; Clarity Required for Imposing Tax Law Penalties.</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/highlights?id=72862</link>
    <description>Penalty u/s 271(1)(c) - Specific charge - There was obviously no clarity in the mind of the AO as to which limb of Section 271(1)(c) got attracted in the instant case for initiation, followed by imposition of penalty. ITAT was justified in law in deleting the penalty - HC</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Thu, 02 Nov 2023 09:25:19 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Thu, 02 Nov 2023 09:25:19 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=731060" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>Tax Penalty Overturned Due to Ambiguity in Charges; Clarity Required for Imposing Tax Law Penalties.</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/highlights?id=72862</link>
      <description>Penalty u/s 271(1)(c) - Specific charge - There was obviously no clarity in the mind of the AO as to which limb of Section 271(1)(c) got attracted in the instant case for initiation, followed by imposition of penalty. ITAT was justified in law in deleting the penalty - HC</description>
      <category>Highlights</category>
      <law>Income Tax</law>
      <pubDate>Thu, 02 Nov 2023 09:25:19 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/highlights?id=72862</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>