<?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 (1) TMI 707 - MADRAS HIGH COURT</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=206898</link>
    <description>In block assessment proceedings, material available with the Assessing Officer on the search date, including a statement recorded before the search, could be relied on under the amended section 158BB(1), which operated retrospectively from 1-7-1995. On the evidence, deposits and interest credits were treated as undisclosed income because some creditors&#039; statements showed the credits were not genuine, while later statements from others were rejected for lack of supporting material and proof of funds. The High Court treated these findings as concurrent factual determinations and declined interference. The block assessment was sustained and the assessee&#039;s appeals failed.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Mon, 04 Jan 2010 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Sat, 19 Nov 2011 18:42:00 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=180381" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2010 (1) TMI 707 - MADRAS HIGH COURT</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=206898</link>
      <description>In block assessment proceedings, material available with the Assessing Officer on the search date, including a statement recorded before the search, could be relied on under the amended section 158BB(1), which operated retrospectively from 1-7-1995. On the evidence, deposits and interest credits were treated as undisclosed income because some creditors&#039; statements showed the credits were not genuine, while later statements from others were rejected for lack of supporting material and proof of funds. The High Court treated these findings as concurrent factual determinations and declined interference. The block assessment was sustained and the assessee&#039;s appeals failed.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Income Tax</law>
      <pubDate>Mon, 04 Jan 2010 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=206898</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>