<?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>1982 (4) TMI 153 - ITAT INDORE</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=67025</link>
    <description>The Tribunal upheld the AAC&#039;s decision to delete the enhanced share of profit added in the Wealth Tax assessment, dismissing the revenue&#039;s appeal. The Tribunal found that the AAC&#039;s decision was justified as the Department failed to prove the actual existence of the asset in question and could not introduce a new case post-assessment. The Tribunal concluded that the AAC&#039;s order was valid and supported by the reasons provided in the appellate order, leading to the deletion of the addition being upheld.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Tue, 20 Apr 1982 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Tue, 08 Mar 2011 17:49:59 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=105460" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>1982 (4) TMI 153 - ITAT INDORE</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=67025</link>
      <description>The Tribunal upheld the AAC&#039;s decision to delete the enhanced share of profit added in the Wealth Tax assessment, dismissing the revenue&#039;s appeal. The Tribunal found that the AAC&#039;s decision was justified as the Department failed to prove the actual existence of the asset in question and could not introduce a new case post-assessment. The Tribunal concluded that the AAC&#039;s order was valid and supported by the reasons provided in the appellate order, leading to the deletion of the addition being upheld.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Wealth-tax</law>
      <pubDate>Tue, 20 Apr 1982 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=67025</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>