<?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 (4) TMI 636 - ITAT AHMEDABAD</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=326522</link>
    <description>The Tribunal partially allowed the appeal by deleting the addition of Rs. 18 lakhs as unexplained payment due to lack of tangible evidence. However, it upheld the addition of Rs. 3,19,500 as unexplained cash credit. The protective addition of Rs. 18 lakhs under Section 69C was nullified in a related case, emphasizing the requirement for concrete evidence and providing fair opportunities for assessees to defend against allegations under the Income Tax Act.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Wed, 06 Apr 2016 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Mon, 18 Apr 2016 08:14:43 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=424153" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2016 (4) TMI 636 - ITAT AHMEDABAD</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=326522</link>
      <description>The Tribunal partially allowed the appeal by deleting the addition of Rs. 18 lakhs as unexplained payment due to lack of tangible evidence. However, it upheld the addition of Rs. 3,19,500 as unexplained cash credit. The protective addition of Rs. 18 lakhs under Section 69C was nullified in a related case, emphasizing the requirement for concrete evidence and providing fair opportunities for assessees to defend against allegations under the Income Tax Act.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Income Tax</law>
      <pubDate>Wed, 06 Apr 2016 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=326522</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>