<?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>2002 (1) TMI 247 - ITAT AHMEDABAD</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=55085</link>
    <description>The Tribunal upheld the penalty under section 271(1)(c) of the Income Tax Act but remitted the matter to the CIT(A) to verify if the Assessing Officer recorded the necessary satisfaction during the assessment proceedings. The appeal was partly allowed for statistical purposes.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Tue, 22 Jan 2002 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Tue, 23 Nov 2010 16:58:00 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=93548" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2002 (1) TMI 247 - ITAT AHMEDABAD</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=55085</link>
      <description>The Tribunal upheld the penalty under section 271(1)(c) of the Income Tax Act but remitted the matter to the CIT(A) to verify if the Assessing Officer recorded the necessary satisfaction during the assessment proceedings. The appeal was partly allowed for statistical purposes.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Income Tax</law>
      <pubDate>Tue, 22 Jan 2002 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=55085</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>