<?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>2010 (2) TMI 1184 - ITAT AHMEDABAD</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=180498</link>
    <description>The appeal against the deletion of addition and taxation under section 112(1)(d) of the I.T. Act was upheld. The CIT(A) decision to delete the addition and tax the assessee under the proviso to section 112(1)(d) was affirmed by the tribunal, as the genuineness of the transactions was established through broker confirmations and remand reports. The tribunal found no need for interference, upholding the CIT(A)&#039;s judgment.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Fri, 12 Feb 2010 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Sat, 26 Aug 2023 13:33:00 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=421414" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2010 (2) TMI 1184 - ITAT AHMEDABAD</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=180498</link>
      <description>The appeal against the deletion of addition and taxation under section 112(1)(d) of the I.T. Act was upheld. The CIT(A) decision to delete the addition and tax the assessee under the proviso to section 112(1)(d) was affirmed by the tribunal, as the genuineness of the transactions was established through broker confirmations and remand reports. The tribunal found no need for interference, upholding the CIT(A)&#039;s judgment.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Income Tax</law>
      <pubDate>Fri, 12 Feb 2010 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=180498</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>