<?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 (5) TMI 677 - ITAT CHANDIGARH</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=259803</link>
    <description>The Tribunal upheld the Commissioner of Income-tax (Appeals)&#039; decision to delete the addition of Rs. 23,62,500 under Section 69B of the Income-tax Act. The Tribunal found that the Revenue&#039;s suspicion lacked legal proof, emphasizing the necessity of credible evidence for such additions. The appeal by the Revenue was dismissed, affirming the deletion of the unexplained investment amount.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Fri, 12 Dec 2014 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Fri, 22 May 2015 15:04:57 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=385717" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2015 (5) TMI 677 - ITAT CHANDIGARH</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=259803</link>
      <description>The Tribunal upheld the Commissioner of Income-tax (Appeals)&#039; decision to delete the addition of Rs. 23,62,500 under Section 69B of the Income-tax Act. The Tribunal found that the Revenue&#039;s suspicion lacked legal proof, emphasizing the necessity of credible evidence for such additions. The appeal by the Revenue was dismissed, affirming the deletion of the unexplained investment amount.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Income Tax</law>
      <pubDate>Fri, 12 Dec 2014 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=259803</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>