<?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 (7) TMI 1895 - ITAT DELHI</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=796009</link>
    <description>Penalty for concealment under Section 271(1)(c) cannot survive where the underlying reassessment and the first appellate quantum order have been quashed. Reassessment proceedings were invalid because they were initiated without due application of mind; consequently, the assessment forming the basis for the penalty no longer subsisted. The penalty order therefore lacked an independent foundation and was quashed in favour of the assessee.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Mon, 27 Jul 2026 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Thu, 30 Jul 2026 08:52:45 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=914305" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2026 (7) TMI 1895 - ITAT DELHI</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=796009</link>
      <description>Penalty for concealment under Section 271(1)(c) cannot survive where the underlying reassessment and the first appellate quantum order have been quashed. Reassessment proceedings were invalid because they were initiated without due application of mind; consequently, the assessment forming the basis for the penalty no longer subsisted. The penalty order therefore lacked an independent foundation and was quashed in favour of the assessee.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Income Tax</law>
      <pubDate>Mon, 27 Jul 2026 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=796009</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>