<?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 1052 - ITAT MUMBAI</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=177149</link>
    <description>The Tribunal allowed the appeals by both assessees and dismissed the Revenue&#039;s appeal. It concluded that the jewellery found during the search was not unexplained, as the total weight declared by the family exceeded the jewellery found. The Tribunal ordered deletion of the additions in both cases, noting that minor discrepancies in carat weight estimates should not be the sole basis for additions. The order was pronounced on 31.07.2015.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Fri, 31 Jul 2015 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Mon, 04 Jan 2016 12:58:17 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=411787" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2015 (7) TMI 1052 - ITAT MUMBAI</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=177149</link>
      <description>The Tribunal allowed the appeals by both assessees and dismissed the Revenue&#039;s appeal. It concluded that the jewellery found during the search was not unexplained, as the total weight declared by the family exceeded the jewellery found. The Tribunal ordered deletion of the additions in both cases, noting that minor discrepancies in carat weight estimates should not be the sole basis for additions. The order was pronounced on 31.07.2015.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Income Tax</law>
      <pubDate>Fri, 31 Jul 2015 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=177149</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>