<?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 (5) TMI 254 - ITAT KOLKATA</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=359690</link>
    <description>The Tribunal allowed the appeal for A.Y. 2011-12, directing the A.O. to delete the addition for alleged bogus purchases. The decision was based on the findings from the A.Y. 2010-11 case, where the genuineness of purchases from disputed parties was confirmed through stock register entries, explanations, and cross-examination. The Tribunal upheld the appellant&#039;s explanations and established the legitimacy of the purchases, leading to the deletion of the addition for A.Y. 2011-12.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Tue, 01 May 2018 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Thu, 03 May 2018 06:36:16 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=518922" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2018 (5) TMI 254 - ITAT KOLKATA</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=359690</link>
      <description>The Tribunal allowed the appeal for A.Y. 2011-12, directing the A.O. to delete the addition for alleged bogus purchases. The decision was based on the findings from the A.Y. 2010-11 case, where the genuineness of purchases from disputed parties was confirmed through stock register entries, explanations, and cross-examination. The Tribunal upheld the appellant&#039;s explanations and established the legitimacy of the purchases, leading to the deletion of the addition for A.Y. 2011-12.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Income Tax</law>
      <pubDate>Tue, 01 May 2018 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=359690</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>