<?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 (10) TMI 78 - ITAT DELHI</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=779282</link>
    <description>ITAT DELHI (AT) allowed the appeal and deleted the penalty under section 271AAB(1A) levied at 30% of undisclosed income. The tribunal held that a search statement alone cannot sustain a penalty where the statutory explanation requires specific seized material; applying a stricter interpretation, the impugned penalty was found unsustainable in law and therefore set aside.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Mon, 20 Jan 2025 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Fri, 03 Oct 2025 08:30:37 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=855951" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2025 (10) TMI 78 - ITAT DELHI</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=779282</link>
      <description>ITAT DELHI (AT) allowed the appeal and deleted the penalty under section 271AAB(1A) levied at 30% of undisclosed income. The tribunal held that a search statement alone cannot sustain a penalty where the statutory explanation requires specific seized material; applying a stricter interpretation, the impugned penalty was found unsustainable in law and therefore set aside.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Income Tax</law>
      <pubDate>Mon, 20 Jan 2025 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=779282</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>