<?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>2025 (3) TMI 449 - ITAT MUMBAI</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=767063</link>
    <description>The ITAT Mumbai quashed a penalty imposed under section 271G for failure to furnish transfer pricing documents under section 92D. The tribunal held that penalty cannot be levied unless specific defects are identified in submitted documents or proper notice is issued under section 92D(3) requiring additional information. Since no such notice was issued to the non-resident German company, the penalty was deemed inappropriate and the revenue&#039;s appeal was dismissed.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Wed, 05 Mar 2025 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Mon, 10 Mar 2025 08:42:27 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=805251" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2025 (3) TMI 449 - ITAT MUMBAI</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=767063</link>
      <description>The ITAT Mumbai quashed a penalty imposed under section 271G for failure to furnish transfer pricing documents under section 92D. The tribunal held that penalty cannot be levied unless specific defects are identified in submitted documents or proper notice is issued under section 92D(3) requiring additional information. Since no such notice was issued to the non-resident German company, the penalty was deemed inappropriate and the revenue&#039;s appeal was dismissed.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Income Tax</law>
      <pubDate>Wed, 05 Mar 2025 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=767063</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>