<?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 (11) TMI 829 - ITAT DELHI</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=239652</link>
    <description>The Tribunal partly allowed the appeal for the assessment year 2003-04, directing the Assessing Officer to re-adjudicate the addition on account of unexplained investments. The appeals for the assessment years 2004-05, 2005-06, 2006-07, and 2007-08 were dismissed. For the assessment years 2008-09 and 2009-10, the appeals were partly allowed for statistical purposes, instructing the AO to re-adjudicate the benefit of telescoping.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Tue, 12 Nov 2013 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Tue, 22 Mar 2016 13:16:00 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=336131" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2013 (11) TMI 829 - ITAT DELHI</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=239652</link>
      <description>The Tribunal partly allowed the appeal for the assessment year 2003-04, directing the Assessing Officer to re-adjudicate the addition on account of unexplained investments. The appeals for the assessment years 2004-05, 2005-06, 2006-07, and 2007-08 were dismissed. For the assessment years 2008-09 and 2009-10, the appeals were partly allowed for statistical purposes, instructing the AO to re-adjudicate the benefit of telescoping.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Income Tax</law>
      <pubDate>Tue, 12 Nov 2013 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=239652</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>