<?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 (4) TMI 636 - DELHI HIGH COURT</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=258755</link>
    <description>The Income Tax Appellate Tribunal&#039;s decision to uphold the addition of undisclosed income based on seized documents was affirmed by the Court. The Tribunal found that the evidence presented supported the additions made by the lower authorities, including the Rs. 1,35,00,000 and Rs. 49,64,904 amounts. The Court dismissed the appeal at the third appellate level, concluding that no substantial question of law arose from the interpretation of the documents.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Mon, 06 Apr 2015 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Mon, 20 Apr 2015 10:54:57 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=382339" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2015 (4) TMI 636 - DELHI HIGH COURT</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=258755</link>
      <description>The Income Tax Appellate Tribunal&#039;s decision to uphold the addition of undisclosed income based on seized documents was affirmed by the Court. The Tribunal found that the evidence presented supported the additions made by the lower authorities, including the Rs. 1,35,00,000 and Rs. 49,64,904 amounts. The Court dismissed the appeal at the third appellate level, concluding that no substantial question of law arose from the interpretation of the documents.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Income Tax</law>
      <pubDate>Mon, 06 Apr 2015 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=258755</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>