<?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>1988 (3) TMI 107 - ITAT DELHI-A</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=63160</link>
    <description>The tribunal ruled in favor of the assessee on both issues. It concluded that the amount declared under High Denomination Notes Declaration was part of the cash balance and not undisclosed income. Additionally, the tribunal found the reopening of the assessment to be legally invalid as there was no new information warranting such action. As a result, the tribunal allowed the appeal in part, supporting the assessee&#039;s position on both matters.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Wed, 23 Mar 1988 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Fri, 28 Jan 2011 11:16:02 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=101604" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>1988 (3) TMI 107 - ITAT DELHI-A</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=63160</link>
      <description>The tribunal ruled in favor of the assessee on both issues. It concluded that the amount declared under High Denomination Notes Declaration was part of the cash balance and not undisclosed income. Additionally, the tribunal found the reopening of the assessment to be legally invalid as there was no new information warranting such action. As a result, the tribunal allowed the appeal in part, supporting the assessee&#039;s position on both matters.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Income Tax</law>
      <pubDate>Wed, 23 Mar 1988 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=63160</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>