<?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>2026 (6) TMI 675 - ITAT HYDERABAD</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=793294</link>
    <description>Penalty under section 271(1)(c) for earlier years and under section 270A for a later year could not survive once the reassessment was quashed and the related quantum addition was deleted. Because the penalty arose solely from additions made in assessment proceedings, and those foundational additions no longer existed, the penalty proceedings had no independent footing. The penalty orders were therefore unsustainable and were deleted.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Wed, 10 Jun 2026 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Fri, 12 Jun 2026 08:45:01 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=906619" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2026 (6) TMI 675 - ITAT HYDERABAD</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=793294</link>
      <description>Penalty under section 271(1)(c) for earlier years and under section 270A for a later year could not survive once the reassessment was quashed and the related quantum addition was deleted. Because the penalty arose solely from additions made in assessment proceedings, and those foundational additions no longer existed, the penalty proceedings had no independent footing. The penalty orders were therefore unsustainable and were deleted.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Income Tax</law>
      <pubDate>Wed, 10 Jun 2026 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=793294</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>