<?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 (3) TMI 44 - ITAT CHENNAI</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=272232</link>
    <description>The Tribunal upheld the CIT(A)&#039;s decision, dismissing the Revenue&#039;s appeal. The amounts credited to the assessee&#039;s personal accounts were not unexplained credits under section 68 of the Income Tax Act, as the assessee demonstrated the identity and genuineness of the transactions, and the creditworthiness of the creditors was not in question. The CIT(A)&#039;s deletion of the addition made under section 68 was affirmed, and the appeal was dismissed.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Fri, 22 Jan 2016 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Wed, 02 Mar 2016 08:42:04 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=418563" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2016 (3) TMI 44 - ITAT CHENNAI</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=272232</link>
      <description>The Tribunal upheld the CIT(A)&#039;s decision, dismissing the Revenue&#039;s appeal. The amounts credited to the assessee&#039;s personal accounts were not unexplained credits under section 68 of the Income Tax Act, as the assessee demonstrated the identity and genuineness of the transactions, and the creditworthiness of the creditors was not in question. The CIT(A)&#039;s deletion of the addition made under section 68 was affirmed, and the appeal was dismissed.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Income Tax</law>
      <pubDate>Fri, 22 Jan 2016 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=272232</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>