<?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>2011 (6) TMI 877 - ITAT DELHI</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=185596</link>
    <description>The Tribunal dismissed the appeals by the revenue and cross objections by the assessee in a case involving additions related to unexplained investments and undisclosed interest. The CIT(A) had deleted the additions due to lack of evidence provided to the assessee and procedural irregularities, but upheld the validity of reassessment proceedings. The Tribunal relied on previous similar cases where additions were deleted based on insufficient evidence, leading to the dismissal of the current appeals and cross objections.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Thu, 16 Jun 2011 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Sat, 20 Aug 2016 17:33:42 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=438779" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2011 (6) TMI 877 - ITAT DELHI</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=185596</link>
      <description>The Tribunal dismissed the appeals by the revenue and cross objections by the assessee in a case involving additions related to unexplained investments and undisclosed interest. The CIT(A) had deleted the additions due to lack of evidence provided to the assessee and procedural irregularities, but upheld the validity of reassessment proceedings. The Tribunal relied on previous similar cases where additions were deleted based on insufficient evidence, leading to the dismissal of the current appeals and cross objections.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Income Tax</law>
      <pubDate>Thu, 16 Jun 2011 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=185596</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>