<?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 (8) TMI 1097 - DELHI HIGH COURT</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=263180</link>
    <description>The Court upheld the decisions of the Commissioner of Income Tax and the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal regarding the deletion of an addition based on net profit rate and discrepancies between the Assessee&#039;s withdrawals and bank cash deposits. The Court found no substantial question of law in the first issue, emphasizing the need for evidence-based net profit rate estimates. In the second issue, the Court declined to frame a legal question and dismissed the appeal, affirming the addition sustained by the ITAT.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Wed, 12 Aug 2015 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Fri, 28 Aug 2015 07:49:00 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=395052" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2015 (8) TMI 1097 - DELHI HIGH COURT</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=263180</link>
      <description>The Court upheld the decisions of the Commissioner of Income Tax and the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal regarding the deletion of an addition based on net profit rate and discrepancies between the Assessee&#039;s withdrawals and bank cash deposits. The Court found no substantial question of law in the first issue, emphasizing the need for evidence-based net profit rate estimates. In the second issue, the Court declined to frame a legal question and dismissed the appeal, affirming the addition sustained by the ITAT.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Income Tax</law>
      <pubDate>Wed, 12 Aug 2015 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=263180</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>