<?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 199 - ITAT COCHIN</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=779403</link>
    <description>Penalty confirmation under section 271(1)(c) was found unsustainable where the first appellate authority merely reproduced the facts, grounds and written submissions without independently examining the record or addressing the assessee&#039;s objections. Because no reasoned finding on the merits was recorded, the matter required reconsideration. The case was therefore remanded for de novo adjudication in accordance with law, with an opportunity of hearing to the assessee.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Wed, 22 Jan 2025 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Mon, 06 Oct 2025 09:10:48 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=856429" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2025 (10) TMI 199 - ITAT COCHIN</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=779403</link>
      <description>Penalty confirmation under section 271(1)(c) was found unsustainable where the first appellate authority merely reproduced the facts, grounds and written submissions without independently examining the record or addressing the assessee&#039;s objections. Because no reasoned finding on the merits was recorded, the matter required reconsideration. The case was therefore remanded for de novo adjudication in accordance with law, with an opportunity of hearing to the assessee.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Income Tax</law>
      <pubDate>Wed, 22 Jan 2025 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=779403</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>