<?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>2003 (9) TMI 24 - PATNA High Court</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=11120</link>
    <description>The High Court of Patna dismissed the appeal as the Tribunal found that section 68 of the Income-tax Act was not attracted. The credit in the books of account was due to the introduction of capital by partners, and the firm failed to prove the amount credited. The unexplained investment would be assessed in the hands of the partners.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Wed, 10 Sep 2003 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Fri, 31 Jul 2009 11:19:00 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=50139" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2003 (9) TMI 24 - PATNA High Court</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=11120</link>
      <description>The High Court of Patna dismissed the appeal as the Tribunal found that section 68 of the Income-tax Act was not attracted. The credit in the books of account was due to the introduction of capital by partners, and the firm failed to prove the amount credited. The unexplained investment would be assessed in the hands of the partners.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Income Tax</law>
      <pubDate>Wed, 10 Sep 2003 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=11120</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>