<?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>2001 (9) TMI 1136 - ITAT MUMBAI</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=178758</link>
    <description>The Tribunal found that the statement recorded under section 132(4) was voluntary and not made under duress. The retraction of the statement was deemed invalid as it lacked evidence of coercion. The disclosure in the statement was supported by seized documents showing unaccounted transactions, leading to the confirmation of undisclosed income and dismissal of the assessee&#039;s appeal.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Mon, 24 Sep 2001 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Fri, 12 Feb 2016 10:05:57 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=416248" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2001 (9) TMI 1136 - ITAT MUMBAI</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=178758</link>
      <description>The Tribunal found that the statement recorded under section 132(4) was voluntary and not made under duress. The retraction of the statement was deemed invalid as it lacked evidence of coercion. The disclosure in the statement was supported by seized documents showing unaccounted transactions, leading to the confirmation of undisclosed income and dismissal of the assessee&#039;s appeal.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Income Tax</law>
      <pubDate>Mon, 24 Sep 2001 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=178758</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>