<?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>1971 (2) TMI 21 - BOMBAY High Court</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=8319</link>
    <description>Bombay HC upheld the Tribunal&#039;s finding that a remittance from Madras to Bombay constituted income from undisclosed sources, holding that the conclusion could rest on the cumulative effect of bank correspondence, the telegraphic transfer application, the employment link between the remitter and recipient, the use of the assessee&#039;s business addresses, and the size of the remittance. The absence of the item from the books did not defeat the finding where other material proved it. The Court also rejected the natural justice challenge, noting that the fresh bank material had been disclosed and an opportunity to explain was given, so no denial of fair hearing was established.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Mon, 22 Feb 1971 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Thu, 09 Apr 2009 17:42:00 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=47363" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>1971 (2) TMI 21 - BOMBAY High Court</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=8319</link>
      <description>Bombay HC upheld the Tribunal&#039;s finding that a remittance from Madras to Bombay constituted income from undisclosed sources, holding that the conclusion could rest on the cumulative effect of bank correspondence, the telegraphic transfer application, the employment link between the remitter and recipient, the use of the assessee&#039;s business addresses, and the size of the remittance. The absence of the item from the books did not defeat the finding where other material proved it. The Court also rejected the natural justice challenge, noting that the fresh bank material had been disclosed and an opportunity to explain was given, so no denial of fair hearing was established.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Income Tax</law>
      <pubDate>Mon, 22 Feb 1971 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=8319</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>