<?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 186 - DELHI HIGH COURT</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=78977</link>
    <description>Addition for income from undisclosed sources was deleted because the shares had been sold in the preceding assessment year and the resulting income had already been accepted by the Department. The addition was also found to rest on general statements, and the assessee had not been given an opportunity to cross-examine the material relied on by the Department. On these facts, the deletion was upheld and no interference was called for.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Fri, 17 Sep 2010 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Tue, 28 Dec 2010 23:06:57 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=117072" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2010 (9) TMI 186 - DELHI HIGH COURT</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=78977</link>
      <description>Addition for income from undisclosed sources was deleted because the shares had been sold in the preceding assessment year and the resulting income had already been accepted by the Department. The addition was also found to rest on general statements, and the assessee had not been given an opportunity to cross-examine the material relied on by the Department. On these facts, the deletion was upheld and no interference was called for.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Income Tax</law>
      <pubDate>Fri, 17 Sep 2010 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=78977</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>