<?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>2009 (12) TMI 440 - DELHI HIGH COURT</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=78166</link>
    <description>The High Court upheld the addition of Rs. 51,76,200 as undisclosed income based on a loose sheet of paper connected to land purchase, rejecting the appellant&#039;s arguments. However, the issue of unexplained jewellery worth Rs. 8,86,794 was remitted back to the ITAT for reconsideration due to lack of independent analysis by the ITAT and failure to consider the appellant&#039;s explanation regarding the jewellery belonging to his mother-in-law.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Wed, 23 Dec 2009 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Wed, 03 Nov 2010 00:00:00 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=116297" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2009 (12) TMI 440 - DELHI HIGH COURT</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=78166</link>
      <description>The High Court upheld the addition of Rs. 51,76,200 as undisclosed income based on a loose sheet of paper connected to land purchase, rejecting the appellant&#039;s arguments. However, the issue of unexplained jewellery worth Rs. 8,86,794 was remitted back to the ITAT for reconsideration due to lack of independent analysis by the ITAT and failure to consider the appellant&#039;s explanation regarding the jewellery belonging to his mother-in-law.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Income Tax</law>
      <pubDate>Wed, 23 Dec 2009 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=78166</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>