<?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>2013 (3) TMI 441 - BOMBAY HIGH COURT</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=221675</link>
    <description>The High Court upheld the decision of the lower authorities, stating that no substantial question of law arose in the appeal. Despite multiple opportunities, the appellant failed to provide necessary documentary evidence to support claims regarding unaccounted iron ore. The Court found the Tribunal justified in rejecting the application for additional evidence and dismissed the Income Tax Appeals for the relevant assessment years, affirming the orders of the lower authorities.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Mon, 25 Feb 2013 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Tue, 19 Mar 2013 18:44:00 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=195027" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2013 (3) TMI 441 - BOMBAY HIGH COURT</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=221675</link>
      <description>The High Court upheld the decision of the lower authorities, stating that no substantial question of law arose in the appeal. Despite multiple opportunities, the appellant failed to provide necessary documentary evidence to support claims regarding unaccounted iron ore. The Court found the Tribunal justified in rejecting the application for additional evidence and dismissed the Income Tax Appeals for the relevant assessment years, affirming the orders of the lower authorities.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Income Tax</law>
      <pubDate>Mon, 25 Feb 2013 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=221675</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>