<?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 1019 - RAJASTHAN HIGH COURT</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=351140</link>
    <description>The High Court dismissed the appeal, upholding the decision in favor of the assessee due to the lack of concrete evidence supporting the addition of Rs. 5.13 crore by the Assessing Officer. The judgment emphasized the importance of factual evidence and legal precedents in determining tax liability accurately and fairly.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Mon, 21 Aug 2017 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Mon, 20 Nov 2017 07:26:55 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=496768" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2017 (11) TMI 1019 - RAJASTHAN HIGH COURT</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=351140</link>
      <description>The High Court dismissed the appeal, upholding the decision in favor of the assessee due to the lack of concrete evidence supporting the addition of Rs. 5.13 crore by the Assessing Officer. The judgment emphasized the importance of factual evidence and legal precedents in determining tax liability accurately and fairly.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Income Tax</law>
      <pubDate>Mon, 21 Aug 2017 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=351140</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>