<?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 1095 - ITAT MUMBAI</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=184682</link>
    <description>The appeal was against the CIT(A) order confirming an addition of Rs. 4,19,356 as estimated profit on unexplained purchases. The Tribunal found no evidence supporting the bogus purchase claims and directed the deletion of the entire amount added by the Assessing Officer. As the appeal succeeded, the challenge against the initiation of proceedings under section 147/148 of the Income Tax Act was not adjudicated, and the appeal of the assessee was allowed.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Fri, 18 Mar 2016 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Sat, 16 Jul 2016 12:00:19 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=435144" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2016 (3) TMI 1095 - ITAT MUMBAI</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=184682</link>
      <description>The appeal was against the CIT(A) order confirming an addition of Rs. 4,19,356 as estimated profit on unexplained purchases. The Tribunal found no evidence supporting the bogus purchase claims and directed the deletion of the entire amount added by the Assessing Officer. As the appeal succeeded, the challenge against the initiation of proceedings under section 147/148 of the Income Tax Act was not adjudicated, and the appeal of the assessee was allowed.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Income Tax</law>
      <pubDate>Fri, 18 Mar 2016 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=184682</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>