<?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 119 - ITAT MUMBAI</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=272307</link>
    <description>The Tribunal found that the addition of Rs. 40,00,000/- by the Assessing Officer based on a diary entry was not justified due to lack of corroborative evidence and discrepancies. The Tribunal ruled that even if cash was received, it should be taxed in the year the sale was booked. Consequently, the addition was directed to be deleted, and the appeal was allowed.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Fri, 12 Feb 2016 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Mon, 06 Feb 2017 14:38:00 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=418944" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2016 (3) TMI 119 - ITAT MUMBAI</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=272307</link>
      <description>The Tribunal found that the addition of Rs. 40,00,000/- by the Assessing Officer based on a diary entry was not justified due to lack of corroborative evidence and discrepancies. The Tribunal ruled that even if cash was received, it should be taxed in the year the sale was booked. Consequently, the addition was directed to be deleted, and the appeal was allowed.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Income Tax</law>
      <pubDate>Fri, 12 Feb 2016 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=272307</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>