<?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 (8) TMI 740 - Punjab and Haryana High Court</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=209299</link>
    <description>The court ruled in favor of the Revenue, setting aside the orders of the Commissioner of Income-tax (Appeals) and the Tribunal. The appeal was disposed of, affirming the addition of the gifts as undisclosed income of the firm. The court emphasized that unexplained credit entries should be added to the firm&#039;s or partner&#039;s income based on the specific facts and circumstances of each case, highlighting the distinction between income of partners and the firm.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Mon, 02 Aug 2010 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Fri, 03 Jun 2016 10:52:00 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=182751" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2010 (8) TMI 740 - Punjab and Haryana High Court</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=209299</link>
      <description>The court ruled in favor of the Revenue, setting aside the orders of the Commissioner of Income-tax (Appeals) and the Tribunal. The appeal was disposed of, affirming the addition of the gifts as undisclosed income of the firm. The court emphasized that unexplained credit entries should be added to the firm&#039;s or partner&#039;s income based on the specific facts and circumstances of each case, highlighting the distinction between income of partners and the firm.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Income Tax</law>
      <pubDate>Mon, 02 Aug 2010 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=209299</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>