<?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 (5) TMI 970 - ITAT AHMEDABAD</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=770698</link>
    <description>The SC/Tribunal invalidated penalty proceedings under Income Tax Act section 271(1)(c) due to procedural defects. The notice failed to specify the penalty limb, and the claim disallowance did not warrant penalty as it was made in bona fide belief. The Tribunal quashed the penalty order, finding the AO&#039;s actions non-compliant with legal requirements and precedents, thus protecting the assessee from unwarranted financial penalty.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Tue, 13 May 2025 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Thu, 15 May 2025 07:32:20 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=821839" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2025 (5) TMI 970 - ITAT AHMEDABAD</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=770698</link>
      <description>The SC/Tribunal invalidated penalty proceedings under Income Tax Act section 271(1)(c) due to procedural defects. The notice failed to specify the penalty limb, and the claim disallowance did not warrant penalty as it was made in bona fide belief. The Tribunal quashed the penalty order, finding the AO&#039;s actions non-compliant with legal requirements and precedents, thus protecting the assessee from unwarranted financial penalty.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Income Tax</law>
      <pubDate>Tue, 13 May 2025 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=770698</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>