<?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>2017 (11) TMI 2071 - ITAT DELHI</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=462778</link>
    <description>The ITAT Delhi allowed the assessee&#039;s appeal against penalty u/s 271(1)(c) imposed on cash receipts from property sale. Since the underlying additions on which the penalty was based had already been deleted by the ITAT in the assessee&#039;s own case, the penalty could not survive. The tribunal held that without the primary addition, the penalty proceedings became unsustainable, resulting in the deletion of the disputed penalty.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Wed, 08 Nov 2017 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Tue, 15 Jul 2025 19:09:38 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=836308" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2017 (11) TMI 2071 - ITAT DELHI</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=462778</link>
      <description>The ITAT Delhi allowed the assessee&#039;s appeal against penalty u/s 271(1)(c) imposed on cash receipts from property sale. Since the underlying additions on which the penalty was based had already been deleted by the ITAT in the assessee&#039;s own case, the penalty could not survive. The tribunal held that without the primary addition, the penalty proceedings became unsustainable, resulting in the deletion of the disputed penalty.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Income Tax</law>
      <pubDate>Wed, 08 Nov 2017 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=462778</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>