<?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>1987 (1) TMI 120 - ITAT BANGALORE</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=57726</link>
    <description>Penalty under section 271(1)(c) was held unjustified where the assessee disclosed the nature of cash credits, identified the persons concerned, and expressed readiness to produce further evidence. As the explanation was not found false and no independent departmental enquiry established concealment, Explanation 1 was treated as inapplicable and the proviso protecting a bona fide disclosure prevented a deeming of concealment. The penalty was therefore cancelled.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Fri, 30 Jan 1987 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Mon, 13 Dec 2010 11:45:05 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=96185" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>1987 (1) TMI 120 - ITAT BANGALORE</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=57726</link>
      <description>Penalty under section 271(1)(c) was held unjustified where the assessee disclosed the nature of cash credits, identified the persons concerned, and expressed readiness to produce further evidence. As the explanation was not found false and no independent departmental enquiry established concealment, Explanation 1 was treated as inapplicable and the proviso protecting a bona fide disclosure prevented a deeming of concealment. The penalty was therefore cancelled.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Income Tax</law>
      <pubDate>Fri, 30 Jan 1987 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=57726</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>