<?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>2014 (5) TMI 856 - DELHI HIGH COURT</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=247929</link>
    <description>The Delhi HC accepted the Tribunal&#039;s factual approach on remand and telescoping in search-related additions. It upheld remand of Virendragram project payments for verification against project accounts because the linkage required factual examination and no perversity was shown. It also upheld telescoping of disclosed undisclosed income against ad hoc and unexplained-expenditure additions, finding the disputed sums absorbed by the disclosed amount. The Tribunal&#039;s remand on donations and deletion of additions for household assets and bank deposits were likewise sustained, as the findings rested on evidence appreciation and disclosed no substantial question of law.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Mon, 19 May 2014 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Thu, 21 Aug 2014 11:14:00 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=356376" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2014 (5) TMI 856 - DELHI HIGH COURT</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=247929</link>
      <description>The Delhi HC accepted the Tribunal&#039;s factual approach on remand and telescoping in search-related additions. It upheld remand of Virendragram project payments for verification against project accounts because the linkage required factual examination and no perversity was shown. It also upheld telescoping of disclosed undisclosed income against ad hoc and unexplained-expenditure additions, finding the disputed sums absorbed by the disclosed amount. The Tribunal&#039;s remand on donations and deletion of additions for household assets and bank deposits were likewise sustained, as the findings rested on evidence appreciation and disclosed no substantial question of law.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Income Tax</law>
      <pubDate>Mon, 19 May 2014 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=247929</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>