<?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>2018 (4) TMI 566 - ITAT MUMBAI</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=358455</link>
    <description>The Court allowed the revenue&#039;s appeal for statistical purposes, remanding the matter to the Assessing Officer (A.O) for fresh adjudication. The A.O was directed to verify if the undisclosed income of Rs. 51,25,042 was indeed offered for tax and to ensure compliance with the proviso of Sec. 69C to prevent double taxation.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Fri, 06 Apr 2018 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Wed, 11 Apr 2018 09:37:00 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=516681" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2018 (4) TMI 566 - ITAT MUMBAI</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=358455</link>
      <description>The Court allowed the revenue&#039;s appeal for statistical purposes, remanding the matter to the Assessing Officer (A.O) for fresh adjudication. The A.O was directed to verify if the undisclosed income of Rs. 51,25,042 was indeed offered for tax and to ensure compliance with the proviso of Sec. 69C to prevent double taxation.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Income Tax</law>
      <pubDate>Fri, 06 Apr 2018 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=358455</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>