<?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 (7) TMI 295 - ITAT MUMBAI</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=249258</link>
    <description>The tribunal upheld the invocation of section 68 by the Revenue, assessing the unexplained credit under the head of &#039;income from other sources.&#039; The judgment emphasized the importance of substantiating cash credits in the books of account and rejected the assessee&#039;s argument that the income should be treated as business income. The decision highlighted the need for concrete evidence to support claims and the consequences of failing to meet the burden of proof.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Wed, 18 Jun 2014 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Wed, 09 Jul 2014 09:15:00 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=359076" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2014 (7) TMI 295 - ITAT MUMBAI</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=249258</link>
      <description>The tribunal upheld the invocation of section 68 by the Revenue, assessing the unexplained credit under the head of &#039;income from other sources.&#039; The judgment emphasized the importance of substantiating cash credits in the books of account and rejected the assessee&#039;s argument that the income should be treated as business income. The decision highlighted the need for concrete evidence to support claims and the consequences of failing to meet the burden of proof.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Income Tax</law>
      <pubDate>Wed, 18 Jun 2014 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=249258</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>