<?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 (12) TMI 869 - ITAT JAIPUR</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=336224</link>
    <description>The appeal was partly allowed regarding the addition under Section 69A of the Income Tax Act for cash deposits, with the addition being reduced to Rs. 1.00 lakh. The disallowance of interest payment claimed under Section 24(b) for a self-occupied property was upheld as the property did not belong to the appellant, leading to the dismissal of that aspect of the appeal.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Fri, 16 Dec 2016 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Sat, 17 Dec 2016 18:34:28 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=451972" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2016 (12) TMI 869 - ITAT JAIPUR</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=336224</link>
      <description>The appeal was partly allowed regarding the addition under Section 69A of the Income Tax Act for cash deposits, with the addition being reduced to Rs. 1.00 lakh. The disallowance of interest payment claimed under Section 24(b) for a self-occupied property was upheld as the property did not belong to the appellant, leading to the dismissal of that aspect of the appeal.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Income Tax</law>
      <pubDate>Fri, 16 Dec 2016 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=336224</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>