<?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 (8) TMI 1294 - ITAT MUMBAI</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=757590</link>
    <description>Penalty under section 271(1)(c) was held unsustainable where the assessment addition was based only on estimated gross profit from alleged non-genuine purchases. The Revenue had not fully established concealment of income or furnishing of inaccurate particulars, and mere estimation of profit was insufficient to justify penal action. The penalty was therefore directed to be deleted for each assessment year in appeal.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Tue, 20 Aug 2024 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Thu, 29 Aug 2024 08:19:38 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=765695" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2024 (8) TMI 1294 - ITAT MUMBAI</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=757590</link>
      <description>Penalty under section 271(1)(c) was held unsustainable where the assessment addition was based only on estimated gross profit from alleged non-genuine purchases. The Revenue had not fully established concealment of income or furnishing of inaccurate particulars, and mere estimation of profit was insufficient to justify penal action. The penalty was therefore directed to be deleted for each assessment year in appeal.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Income Tax</law>
      <pubDate>Tue, 20 Aug 2024 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=757590</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>