<?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>2015 (3) TMI 149 - ITAT MUMBAI</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=257213</link>
    <description>The Tribunal partially allowed the assessee&#039;s appeals by deleting various additions made by the AO and CIT(A) without conclusive evidence. The Tribunal emphasized the requirement for the Revenue to substantiate additions with concrete proof rather than assumptions. The Tribunal dismissed the Revenue&#039;s appeals, highlighting the burden of proof on the Revenue to disprove the assessee&#039;s explanations.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Fri, 13 Feb 2015 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Wed, 04 Mar 2015 11:54:00 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=378020" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2015 (3) TMI 149 - ITAT MUMBAI</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=257213</link>
      <description>The Tribunal partially allowed the assessee&#039;s appeals by deleting various additions made by the AO and CIT(A) without conclusive evidence. The Tribunal emphasized the requirement for the Revenue to substantiate additions with concrete proof rather than assumptions. The Tribunal dismissed the Revenue&#039;s appeals, highlighting the burden of proof on the Revenue to disprove the assessee&#039;s explanations.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Income Tax</law>
      <pubDate>Fri, 13 Feb 2015 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=257213</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>