<?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>1954 (10) TMI 43 - PUNJAB HIGH COURT</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=189218</link>
    <description>The High Court ruled in favor of the assessee, stating that the firm adequately explained the credit in question, and there was insufficient material to establish it as undisclosed income. The judgment emphasized the burden of proof on tax authorities when genuine explanations are provided by taxpayers, highlighting the importance of evidence over mere suspicions in tax assessments.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Thu, 14 Oct 1954 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Sat, 31 Dec 2016 16:20:16 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=453668" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>1954 (10) TMI 43 - PUNJAB HIGH COURT</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=189218</link>
      <description>The High Court ruled in favor of the assessee, stating that the firm adequately explained the credit in question, and there was insufficient material to establish it as undisclosed income. The judgment emphasized the burden of proof on tax authorities when genuine explanations are provided by taxpayers, highlighting the importance of evidence over mere suspicions in tax assessments.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Income Tax</law>
      <pubDate>Thu, 14 Oct 1954 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=189218</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>