<?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>2016 (9) TMI 1689 - ITAT JAIPUR</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=464519</link>
    <description>Penalty under section 271A was unsustainable because the assessee had already furnished audited accounts and the inability to produce the books was explained by their alleged loss. The Tribunal followed an earlier order of the same Bench on identical facts and found that the factual basis for treating the case as non-maintenance of books was absent. On that footing, the penalty was deleted.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Mon, 12 Sep 2016 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Fri, 31 Oct 2025 18:20:01 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=861971" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2016 (9) TMI 1689 - ITAT JAIPUR</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=464519</link>
      <description>Penalty under section 271A was unsustainable because the assessee had already furnished audited accounts and the inability to produce the books was explained by their alleged loss. The Tribunal followed an earlier order of the same Bench on identical facts and found that the factual basis for treating the case as non-maintenance of books was absent. On that footing, the penalty was deleted.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Income Tax</law>
      <pubDate>Mon, 12 Sep 2016 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=464519</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>