<?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>2024 (4) TMI 1054 - ITAT RAIPUR</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=751873</link>
    <description>ITAT Raipur dismissed revenue&#039;s appeal in penalty proceedings under section 270A for under-reporting income through depreciation claims on mining rights. The assessee claimed depreciation treating mining rights as intangible assets, which revenue denied citing no extraction activity. CIT(A) accepted assessee&#039;s explanation noting depreciation allowability was debatable, referencing consistent ITAT decisions favoring holding company NMDC. ITAT held assessee had bonafide belief in depreciation eligibility based on precedent decisions and had applied for immunity under section 270AA. Revenue failed to establish malafide intentions, confirming CIT(A)&#039;s decision to delete penalty.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Wed, 24 Apr 2024 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Thu, 25 Apr 2024 18:22:00 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=751218" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2024 (4) TMI 1054 - ITAT RAIPUR</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=751873</link>
      <description>ITAT Raipur dismissed revenue&#039;s appeal in penalty proceedings under section 270A for under-reporting income through depreciation claims on mining rights. The assessee claimed depreciation treating mining rights as intangible assets, which revenue denied citing no extraction activity. CIT(A) accepted assessee&#039;s explanation noting depreciation allowability was debatable, referencing consistent ITAT decisions favoring holding company NMDC. ITAT held assessee had bonafide belief in depreciation eligibility based on precedent decisions and had applied for immunity under section 270AA. Revenue failed to establish malafide intentions, confirming CIT(A)&#039;s decision to delete penalty.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Income Tax</law>
      <pubDate>Wed, 24 Apr 2024 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=751873</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>