<?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>2006 (11) TMI 268 - ITAT JODHPUR</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=68650</link>
    <description>The Tribunal dismissed the appeal of the Revenue and partly allowed the cross-objection in a case involving challenges to survey proceedings, estimation of professional income, low household withdrawals, and unexplained investment in building construction. The Tribunal upheld the dismissal of the survey proceedings challenge due to the authority of the Inspector under the IT Act but allowed the objection regarding lack of authenticity in recorded statements. Additionally, the Tribunal dismissed the estimation of professional income due to lack of valid evidence, accepted the declared household expenses, and deleted the addition for unexplained investment in building construction.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Tue, 07 Nov 2006 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Thu, 26 Jul 2012 17:33:00 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=107044" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2006 (11) TMI 268 - ITAT JODHPUR</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=68650</link>
      <description>The Tribunal dismissed the appeal of the Revenue and partly allowed the cross-objection in a case involving challenges to survey proceedings, estimation of professional income, low household withdrawals, and unexplained investment in building construction. The Tribunal upheld the dismissal of the survey proceedings challenge due to the authority of the Inspector under the IT Act but allowed the objection regarding lack of authenticity in recorded statements. Additionally, the Tribunal dismissed the estimation of professional income due to lack of valid evidence, accepted the declared household expenses, and deleted the addition for unexplained investment in building construction.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Income Tax</law>
      <pubDate>Tue, 07 Nov 2006 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=68650</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>