<?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>2012 (5) TMI 18 - KERALA HIGH COURT</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=212952</link>
    <description>In block assessment under Chapter XIV-B, search material and corroborative statements from a related assessee could be read together with other relatable evidence to determine undisclosed income under Section 158BB. The absence of an express admission by the assessee did not make the documentary evidence ineffective. On that basis, additions relating to the films &quot;Manathevellitheru&quot; and &quot;No.1 Snehatheeram Bangalore North&quot; were restored because seized realisation statements and distributor material showed higher receipts than the books. The addition for &quot;Pappayude Sontham Appoose&quot; was also restored, as the seized papers and distributor&#039;s statement supported the higher realisation figure.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Fri, 10 Feb 2012 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Wed, 02 May 2012 09:38:00 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=186356" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2012 (5) TMI 18 - KERALA HIGH COURT</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=212952</link>
      <description>In block assessment under Chapter XIV-B, search material and corroborative statements from a related assessee could be read together with other relatable evidence to determine undisclosed income under Section 158BB. The absence of an express admission by the assessee did not make the documentary evidence ineffective. On that basis, additions relating to the films &quot;Manathevellitheru&quot; and &quot;No.1 Snehatheeram Bangalore North&quot; were restored because seized realisation statements and distributor material showed higher receipts than the books. The addition for &quot;Pappayude Sontham Appoose&quot; was also restored, as the seized papers and distributor&#039;s statement supported the higher realisation figure.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Income Tax</law>
      <pubDate>Fri, 10 Feb 2012 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=212952</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>