<?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 400 - ITAT DELHI</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=271695</link>
    <description>The Tribunal upheld the CIT (A)&#039;s decision to delete additions of Rs. 70,00,000/- under Section 68 and Rs. 1,40,000/- on account of commission. It emphasized the importance of allowing the assessee to rebut evidence and the necessity for the AO to provide material evidence to support any additions. The Tribunal found no infirmity in the CIT (A)&#039;s order and dismissed the revenue&#039;s appeal.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Mon, 11 Jan 2016 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Sat, 13 Feb 2016 10:06:50 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=416358" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2016 (2) TMI 400 - ITAT DELHI</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=271695</link>
      <description>The Tribunal upheld the CIT (A)&#039;s decision to delete additions of Rs. 70,00,000/- under Section 68 and Rs. 1,40,000/- on account of commission. It emphasized the importance of allowing the assessee to rebut evidence and the necessity for the AO to provide material evidence to support any additions. The Tribunal found no infirmity in the CIT (A)&#039;s order and dismissed the revenue&#039;s appeal.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Income Tax</law>
      <pubDate>Mon, 11 Jan 2016 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=271695</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>