<?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 660 - ITAT KOLKATA</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=326546</link>
    <description>The Tribunal ruled in favor of the assessee in ITA No. 157/K/2008 and ITA No. 167/K/2008. It held that unexplained cash credits were actually partners&#039; capital, deleting the addition. Additionally, it determined that interest under Section 220(2) should be charged from the fresh assessment&#039;s demand notice date. The Tribunal accepted the genuineness of the disputed purchases, deleting the addition. Consequently, both appeals were allowed in favor of the assessee.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Wed, 24 Feb 2016 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Sat, 16 Apr 2016 13:28:00 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=424301" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2016 (4) TMI 660 - ITAT KOLKATA</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=326546</link>
      <description>The Tribunal ruled in favor of the assessee in ITA No. 157/K/2008 and ITA No. 167/K/2008. It held that unexplained cash credits were actually partners&#039; capital, deleting the addition. Additionally, it determined that interest under Section 220(2) should be charged from the fresh assessment&#039;s demand notice date. The Tribunal accepted the genuineness of the disputed purchases, deleting the addition. Consequently, both appeals were allowed in favor of the assessee.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Income Tax</law>
      <pubDate>Wed, 24 Feb 2016 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=326546</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>