<?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 (7) TMI 290 - ITAT MUMBAI</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=261329</link>
    <description>The Tribunal upheld the CIT(A)&#039;s decision to delete the addition of Rs. 3,13,38,798/- made by the AO, as it was covered under the voluntary disclosure of Rs. 5.36 Crores by the assessee. The Tribunal found no evidence of commodity trading in the grey market and dismissed the Revenue&#039;s appeal, confirming the disclosure was to cover discrepancies in accounts, not from commodity trading. The appeal was dismissed on 30.06.2015.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Tue, 30 Jun 2015 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Thu, 09 Jul 2015 08:18:00 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=389728" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2015 (7) TMI 290 - ITAT MUMBAI</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=261329</link>
      <description>The Tribunal upheld the CIT(A)&#039;s decision to delete the addition of Rs. 3,13,38,798/- made by the AO, as it was covered under the voluntary disclosure of Rs. 5.36 Crores by the assessee. The Tribunal found no evidence of commodity trading in the grey market and dismissed the Revenue&#039;s appeal, confirming the disclosure was to cover discrepancies in accounts, not from commodity trading. The appeal was dismissed on 30.06.2015.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Income Tax</law>
      <pubDate>Tue, 30 Jun 2015 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=261329</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>