<?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 (10) TMI 2047 - ITAT LUCKNOW</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=266773</link>
    <description>The Tribunal dismissed the appeal, concurring with the CIT(A) that the assessee did not prove the identity and creditworthiness of the donor, nor the genuineness of the transaction. The challenge on the jurisdiction of the order under section 153(A) without a search warrant was also rejected based on statutory provisions and legal precedents. Consequently, the Tribunal upheld the CIT(A)&#039;s decision, leading to the dismissal of the assessee&#039;s appeal.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Fri, 11 Sep 2015 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Fri, 23 Oct 2015 21:42:49 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=402987" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2015 (10) TMI 2047 - ITAT LUCKNOW</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=266773</link>
      <description>The Tribunal dismissed the appeal, concurring with the CIT(A) that the assessee did not prove the identity and creditworthiness of the donor, nor the genuineness of the transaction. The challenge on the jurisdiction of the order under section 153(A) without a search warrant was also rejected based on statutory provisions and legal precedents. Consequently, the Tribunal upheld the CIT(A)&#039;s decision, leading to the dismissal of the assessee&#039;s appeal.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Income Tax</law>
      <pubDate>Fri, 11 Sep 2015 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=266773</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>