<?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>2010 (5) TMI 822 - ITAT AHMEDABAD</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=176452</link>
    <description>The Appellate Tribunal allowed the assessee&#039;s appeal, overturning the addition of the diamond value as undisclosed income made by the lower authorities. The Tribunal found substantial evidence supporting the ownership of the diamonds by the assessee, considering documentation, statements of involved parties, and the correlation of seized diamonds with purchases from disclosed sources.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Mon, 31 May 2010 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Wed, 23 Dec 2015 11:30:03 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=410148" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2010 (5) TMI 822 - ITAT AHMEDABAD</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=176452</link>
      <description>The Appellate Tribunal allowed the assessee&#039;s appeal, overturning the addition of the diamond value as undisclosed income made by the lower authorities. The Tribunal found substantial evidence supporting the ownership of the diamonds by the assessee, considering documentation, statements of involved parties, and the correlation of seized diamonds with purchases from disclosed sources.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Income Tax</law>
      <pubDate>Mon, 31 May 2010 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=176452</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>