<?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>2010 (1) TMI 32 - DELHI HIGH COURT</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=35326</link>
    <description>HC dismissed the appeal and upheld imposition of penalty under s.271(1)(c) of Rs.36,41,003 against the assessee. The Court found the Tribunal&#039;s factual conclusion-that profit was estimated after rejection of books and particulars were inaccurate-was not perverse and did not raise any substantial question of law. Consequently, there was no interference with the Tribunal&#039;s order and the appeal was dismissed.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Mon, 25 Jan 2010 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Mon, 01 Sep 2025 16:33:00 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=73920" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2010 (1) TMI 32 - DELHI HIGH COURT</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=35326</link>
      <description>HC dismissed the appeal and upheld imposition of penalty under s.271(1)(c) of Rs.36,41,003 against the assessee. The Court found the Tribunal&#039;s factual conclusion-that profit was estimated after rejection of books and particulars were inaccurate-was not perverse and did not raise any substantial question of law. Consequently, there was no interference with the Tribunal&#039;s order and the appeal was dismissed.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Income Tax</law>
      <pubDate>Mon, 25 Jan 2010 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=35326</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>