<?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>2010 (9) TMI 109 - DELHI HIGH COURT</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=78845</link>
    <description>The court dismissed the appeal challenging the Tribunal&#039;s decision to admit additional evidence during appellate proceedings, finding it in compliance with Rule 46A of the Income Tax Rules, 1962. The court upheld the reduction in the addition made by the Assessing Officer under Section 68/69 of the Income Tax Act, 1961, from Rs. 29,80,995/- to Rs. 93,282/-, as no legal flaw was found in the authorities&#039; actions.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Tue, 21 Sep 2010 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Sun, 06 Feb 2011 02:01:00 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=116949" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2010 (9) TMI 109 - DELHI HIGH COURT</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=78845</link>
      <description>The court dismissed the appeal challenging the Tribunal&#039;s decision to admit additional evidence during appellate proceedings, finding it in compliance with Rule 46A of the Income Tax Rules, 1962. The court upheld the reduction in the addition made by the Assessing Officer under Section 68/69 of the Income Tax Act, 1961, from Rs. 29,80,995/- to Rs. 93,282/-, as no legal flaw was found in the authorities&#039; actions.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Income Tax</law>
      <pubDate>Tue, 21 Sep 2010 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=78845</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>