<?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>2005 (11) TMI 389 - ITAT MUMBAI</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=118656</link>
    <description>Voluntary admissions made during search and later under section 131(1A), when linked to seized papers, diary entries and receipts, retained evidentiary value despite a belated retraction. The Tribunal treated the later denial as ineffective because it was delayed, unsupported by contemporaneous complaint or independent evidence, and did not establish coercion or mistake. It also held that the seized material adequately supported additions for on-money, cash payments and unexplained expenditure, while objections based on valuation, alleged bias and overreach of block assessment failed. The block assessment additions were therefore sustained in full and the appeals were dismissed.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Mon, 07 Nov 2005 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Mon, 15 Apr 2024 11:03:00 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=155653" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2005 (11) TMI 389 - ITAT MUMBAI</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=118656</link>
      <description>Voluntary admissions made during search and later under section 131(1A), when linked to seized papers, diary entries and receipts, retained evidentiary value despite a belated retraction. The Tribunal treated the later denial as ineffective because it was delayed, unsupported by contemporaneous complaint or independent evidence, and did not establish coercion or mistake. It also held that the seized material adequately supported additions for on-money, cash payments and unexplained expenditure, while objections based on valuation, alleged bias and overreach of block assessment failed. The block assessment additions were therefore sustained in full and the appeals were dismissed.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Income Tax</law>
      <pubDate>Mon, 07 Nov 2005 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=118656</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>