<?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>1980 (2) TMI 102 - ITAT BOMBAY-B</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=58429</link>
    <description>For penalty under section 271(1)(a), the statutory ceiling for a registered firm was construed in favour of the assessee rather than on the basis urged by the Revenue. The Tribunal followed its earlier Bombay Bench view that the 50 per cent ceiling on assessed tax was not to be computed in the manner suggested by the department and found no reason to depart from that approach. The departmental appeals therefore failed.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Fri, 29 Feb 1980 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Mon, 20 Dec 2010 09:53:50 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=96887" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>1980 (2) TMI 102 - ITAT BOMBAY-B</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=58429</link>
      <description>For penalty under section 271(1)(a), the statutory ceiling for a registered firm was construed in favour of the assessee rather than on the basis urged by the Revenue. The Tribunal followed its earlier Bombay Bench view that the 50 per cent ceiling on assessed tax was not to be computed in the manner suggested by the department and found no reason to depart from that approach. The departmental appeals therefore failed.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Income Tax</law>
      <pubDate>Fri, 29 Feb 1980 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=58429</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>