<?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>2017 (1) TMI 46 - ITAT KOLKATA</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=336966</link>
    <description>The ITAT Kolkata partially allowed the appeal for AY 2008-09, directing the deletion of the addition on closing stock valuation due to lack of clear verification by the bank. However, the appeal for AY 2009-10 regarding the addition of undisclosed purchases was dismissed as the assessee had admitted to the purchases before the CIT(A) and had been given the opportunity to respond.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Wed, 28 Dec 2016 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Sun, 01 Jan 2017 14:18:48 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=453725" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2017 (1) TMI 46 - ITAT KOLKATA</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=336966</link>
      <description>The ITAT Kolkata partially allowed the appeal for AY 2008-09, directing the deletion of the addition on closing stock valuation due to lack of clear verification by the bank. However, the appeal for AY 2009-10 regarding the addition of undisclosed purchases was dismissed as the assessee had admitted to the purchases before the CIT(A) and had been given the opportunity to respond.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Income Tax</law>
      <pubDate>Wed, 28 Dec 2016 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=336966</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>