<?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>2008 (2) TMI 887 - ITAT ALLAHABAD</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=178765</link>
    <description>An intimation under section 143(1) did not bar completion of a scrutiny assessment under section 143(3) where notice under section 143(2) had been issued within time and the assessment was completed within limitation. Gifts aggregating Rs. 47 lakhs from 13 persons were accepted as genuine because the donors were identifiable, had shown capacity, and the transfers were supported by confirmations, affidavits, bank records and other corroborative material; the receipts were therefore not taxable as unexplained income under section 68. An ad hoc disallowance of vehicle, mobile and telephone s was sustained because personal use could not be excluded.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Mon, 11 Feb 2008 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Wed, 17 Dec 2025 14:31:00 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=416270" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2008 (2) TMI 887 - ITAT ALLAHABAD</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=178765</link>
      <description>An intimation under section 143(1) did not bar completion of a scrutiny assessment under section 143(3) where notice under section 143(2) had been issued within time and the assessment was completed within limitation. Gifts aggregating Rs. 47 lakhs from 13 persons were accepted as genuine because the donors were identifiable, had shown capacity, and the transfers were supported by confirmations, affidavits, bank records and other corroborative material; the receipts were therefore not taxable as unexplained income under section 68. An ad hoc disallowance of vehicle, mobile and telephone s was sustained because personal use could not be excluded.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Income Tax</law>
      <pubDate>Mon, 11 Feb 2008 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=178765</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>