<?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>2003 (4) TMI 245 - ITAT DELHI-C</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=64320</link>
    <description>The Tribunal invalidated the assessment under Sections 158BC and 158BD of the IT Act due to procedural lapses. It ruled that income below the taxable limit should not be treated as undisclosed income, deleting such additions. The Tribunal also upheld the deletion of additions based on unreliable valuation reports but justified the addition of customs duty payment for a VCR due to the lack of a satisfactory explanation from the assessee.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Wed, 23 Apr 2003 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Mon, 07 Feb 2011 11:33:32 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=102762" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2003 (4) TMI 245 - ITAT DELHI-C</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=64320</link>
      <description>The Tribunal invalidated the assessment under Sections 158BC and 158BD of the IT Act due to procedural lapses. It ruled that income below the taxable limit should not be treated as undisclosed income, deleting such additions. The Tribunal also upheld the deletion of additions based on unreliable valuation reports but justified the addition of customs duty payment for a VCR due to the lack of a satisfactory explanation from the assessee.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Income Tax</law>
      <pubDate>Wed, 23 Apr 2003 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=64320</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>