<?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 (10) TMI 74 - DELHI HIGH COURT</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=79051</link>
    <description>The court upheld the tribunal&#039;s decision in a case involving a search and seizure operation where discrepancies arose regarding the ownership of seized jewellery. The appellant&#039;s changing statements and lack of credible evidence led the court to dismiss the appeal. The court emphasized the importance of consistency and credibility in explanations provided during such proceedings, ultimately affirming the tribunal&#039;s findings as reasonable and not erroneous.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Mon, 04 Oct 2010 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Tue, 06 Sep 2011 15:58:00 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=117144" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2010 (10) TMI 74 - DELHI HIGH COURT</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=79051</link>
      <description>The court upheld the tribunal&#039;s decision in a case involving a search and seizure operation where discrepancies arose regarding the ownership of seized jewellery. The appellant&#039;s changing statements and lack of credible evidence led the court to dismiss the appeal. The court emphasized the importance of consistency and credibility in explanations provided during such proceedings, ultimately affirming the tribunal&#039;s findings as reasonable and not erroneous.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Income Tax</law>
      <pubDate>Mon, 04 Oct 2010 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=79051</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>