<?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>1986 (9) TMI 100 - ITAT AMRITSAR</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=57192</link>
    <description>The Tribunal upheld the Appellate Assistant Commissioner&#039;s decision to delete the penalty imposed under section 271(1)(c) of the Income Tax Act. It found that the penalty was not sustainable as the assessee had provided a valid explanation for the undisclosed income, which was not proven false. The Tribunal concluded that the penalty could not be imposed solely based on additions made in the assessment order, ultimately dismissing the Revenue&#039;s appeal.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Wed, 17 Sep 1986 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Wed, 08 Dec 2010 18:07:49 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=95653" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>1986 (9) TMI 100 - ITAT AMRITSAR</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=57192</link>
      <description>The Tribunal upheld the Appellate Assistant Commissioner&#039;s decision to delete the penalty imposed under section 271(1)(c) of the Income Tax Act. It found that the penalty was not sustainable as the assessee had provided a valid explanation for the undisclosed income, which was not proven false. The Tribunal concluded that the penalty could not be imposed solely based on additions made in the assessment order, ultimately dismissing the Revenue&#039;s appeal.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Income Tax</law>
      <pubDate>Wed, 17 Sep 1986 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=57192</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>