<?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>2018 (9) TMI 2168 - ITAT MUMBAI</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=464155</link>
    <description>ITAT-MUMBAI held that the assessee&#039;s claim of purchases remained unproved but was not conclusively disproved by the revenue; absence of irrefutable evidence that amounts represented concealed income meant penalty under s.271(1)(c) could not be sustained. Though additions were made in quantum proceedings, records did not permit a reasonable and positive inference of falsehood. Accordingly the penalty was vacated and the assessee&#039;s appeal allowed.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Wed, 19 Sep 2018 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Wed, 08 Oct 2025 08:46:11 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=857011" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2018 (9) TMI 2168 - ITAT MUMBAI</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=464155</link>
      <description>ITAT-MUMBAI held that the assessee&#039;s claim of purchases remained unproved but was not conclusively disproved by the revenue; absence of irrefutable evidence that amounts represented concealed income meant penalty under s.271(1)(c) could not be sustained. Though additions were made in quantum proceedings, records did not permit a reasonable and positive inference of falsehood. Accordingly the penalty was vacated and the assessee&#039;s appeal allowed.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Income Tax</law>
      <pubDate>Wed, 19 Sep 2018 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=464155</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>