<?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>2012 (3) TMI 536 - ITAT COCHIN</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=185582</link>
    <description>In block assessment proceedings, additions must be anchored in seized material or evidence directly relatable to the search record; where the basis is unclear or not properly traced to seized documents, the matter requires fresh examination and may be restored to the Assessing Officer. Post-search bank materials alone could not support an undisclosed income addition for shop sale receipts, so that relief was upheld. By contrast, on-money receipt for commercial space was sustained because seized papers, survey material and a sworn statement formed a corroborative chain. For the 41.75 cents land transaction, the appellate reduction was maintained because the Revenue did not justify interference.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Fri, 23 Mar 2012 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Sat, 20 Aug 2016 12:09:25 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=438766" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2012 (3) TMI 536 - ITAT COCHIN</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=185582</link>
      <description>In block assessment proceedings, additions must be anchored in seized material or evidence directly relatable to the search record; where the basis is unclear or not properly traced to seized documents, the matter requires fresh examination and may be restored to the Assessing Officer. Post-search bank materials alone could not support an undisclosed income addition for shop sale receipts, so that relief was upheld. By contrast, on-money receipt for commercial space was sustained because seized papers, survey material and a sworn statement formed a corroborative chain. For the 41.75 cents land transaction, the appellate reduction was maintained because the Revenue did not justify interference.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Income Tax</law>
      <pubDate>Fri, 23 Mar 2012 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=185582</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>