<?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 (11) TMI 674 - ITAT MUMBAI</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=350795</link>
    <description>The Tribunal upheld the CIT(A)&#039;s decision to delete the addition under Section 68 of the Income Tax Act, ruling that the funds received by the assessee were not untaxed money. Additionally, the investments in residential flats were deemed satisfactorily explained, leading to the dismissal of the Revenue&#039;s appeal as Sections 68 and 69 were found inapplicable.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Fri, 10 Nov 2017 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Wed, 29 Nov 2017 16:27:00 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=495844" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2017 (11) TMI 674 - ITAT MUMBAI</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=350795</link>
      <description>The Tribunal upheld the CIT(A)&#039;s decision to delete the addition under Section 68 of the Income Tax Act, ruling that the funds received by the assessee were not untaxed money. Additionally, the investments in residential flats were deemed satisfactorily explained, leading to the dismissal of the Revenue&#039;s appeal as Sections 68 and 69 were found inapplicable.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Income Tax</law>
      <pubDate>Fri, 10 Nov 2017 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=350795</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>