<?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>2008 (10) TMI 592 - ITAT CHENNAI</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=151672</link>
    <description>Gold jewellery claimed by an assessee and family members required fresh factual verification because the quantity had not been properly reconciled and the relevant family member was not examined, so the matter was remitted for de novo consideration. Amounts shown as loans, investments and share capital in regular books of account and disclosed in returns and balance-sheets could not be treated as undisclosed income in a Chapter XIV-B block assessment when the material was already on record before the search. For section 158BD also, the recorded satisfaction had to rest on material showing undisclosed income of another person, which was absent here, so those additions were set aside.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Wed, 15 Oct 2008 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Tue, 11 Jun 2013 16:51:00 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=168710" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2008 (10) TMI 592 - ITAT CHENNAI</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=151672</link>
      <description>Gold jewellery claimed by an assessee and family members required fresh factual verification because the quantity had not been properly reconciled and the relevant family member was not examined, so the matter was remitted for de novo consideration. Amounts shown as loans, investments and share capital in regular books of account and disclosed in returns and balance-sheets could not be treated as undisclosed income in a Chapter XIV-B block assessment when the material was already on record before the search. For section 158BD also, the recorded satisfaction had to rest on material showing undisclosed income of another person, which was absent here, so those additions were set aside.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Income Tax</law>
      <pubDate>Wed, 15 Oct 2008 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=151672</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>