<?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>2016 (2) TMI 78 - ITAT CHANDIGARH</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=271373</link>
    <description>Reassessment under section 148 was held invalid where the recorded reasons showed only an attempt to verify marriage expenses and alleged jewellery transfers without fresh tangible material or a live link to escapement of income; the notice was quashed. The estimated addition for marriage expenses was deleted because it rested on assumptions, without examination of contributors, independent enquiry, or supporting evidence. The addition for jewellery, silver utensils and diamonds was also deleted because the will was supported by witnesses and a notary, registration was not legally required, and the Revenue produced no evidence of an unexplained gift in the relevant year.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Wed, 18 Nov 2015 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Wed, 03 Feb 2016 06:51:39 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=415253" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2016 (2) TMI 78 - ITAT CHANDIGARH</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=271373</link>
      <description>Reassessment under section 148 was held invalid where the recorded reasons showed only an attempt to verify marriage expenses and alleged jewellery transfers without fresh tangible material or a live link to escapement of income; the notice was quashed. The estimated addition for marriage expenses was deleted because it rested on assumptions, without examination of contributors, independent enquiry, or supporting evidence. The addition for jewellery, silver utensils and diamonds was also deleted because the will was supported by witnesses and a notary, registration was not legally required, and the Revenue produced no evidence of an unexplained gift in the relevant year.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Income Tax</law>
      <pubDate>Wed, 18 Nov 2015 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=271373</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>