<?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 (3) TMI 109 - DELHI HIGH COURT</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=339606</link>
    <description>The High Court upheld the validity of reassessment proceedings under Sections 147/148 of the Income Tax Act, emphasizing the importance of substantiating transactions and complying with procedural requirements. The Court found the reasons for reopening the assessment to be adequate based on information suggesting unexplained sums from entry operators involved in money laundering. The additions made under Section 68 of the Act were deemed valid as the share applicants were non-existent and failed to respond to summons. The Court dismissed the appeal, affirming the reassessment and additions, highlighting the necessity of proving transaction genuineness to avoid reassessment.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Tue, 07 Feb 2017 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Tue, 09 May 2017 17:39:00 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=460180" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2017 (3) TMI 109 - DELHI HIGH COURT</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=339606</link>
      <description>The High Court upheld the validity of reassessment proceedings under Sections 147/148 of the Income Tax Act, emphasizing the importance of substantiating transactions and complying with procedural requirements. The Court found the reasons for reopening the assessment to be adequate based on information suggesting unexplained sums from entry operators involved in money laundering. The additions made under Section 68 of the Act were deemed valid as the share applicants were non-existent and failed to respond to summons. The Court dismissed the appeal, affirming the reassessment and additions, highlighting the necessity of proving transaction genuineness to avoid reassessment.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Income Tax</law>
      <pubDate>Tue, 07 Feb 2017 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=339606</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>