<?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>2011 (11) TMI 508 - ITAT CHANDIGARH</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=212565</link>
    <description>The Tribunal dismissed the appeal for Assessment Year (AY) 2005-06, while partially allowing the appeals for AY 2006-07 and AY 2007-08. The additions made by the Assessing Officer (AO) regarding unexplained investments and expenses were upheld for AY 2005-06, but the undisclosed commission addition was deleted for lack of reasoning. Interest charged under Section 234B was upheld as mandatory. The Tribunal rejected treating deemed consideration under Section 50C as actual income for investments and adjusted double additions of household expenses. The income estimation for commission was deleted for insufficient reasoning. Adjustment and telescoping of additions were not pursued and dismissed.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Mon, 28 Nov 2011 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Tue, 20 Nov 2012 12:13:00 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=185971" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2011 (11) TMI 508 - ITAT CHANDIGARH</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=212565</link>
      <description>The Tribunal dismissed the appeal for Assessment Year (AY) 2005-06, while partially allowing the appeals for AY 2006-07 and AY 2007-08. The additions made by the Assessing Officer (AO) regarding unexplained investments and expenses were upheld for AY 2005-06, but the undisclosed commission addition was deleted for lack of reasoning. Interest charged under Section 234B was upheld as mandatory. The Tribunal rejected treating deemed consideration under Section 50C as actual income for investments and adjusted double additions of household expenses. The income estimation for commission was deleted for insufficient reasoning. Adjustment and telescoping of additions were not pursued and dismissed.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Income Tax</law>
      <pubDate>Mon, 28 Nov 2011 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=212565</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>