<?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>2000 (3) TMI 57 - KERALA High Court</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=15322</link>
    <description>The High Court upheld the Tribunal&#039;s decision to add Rs. 1,50,000 as income from other sources in the assessment under section 143(3) of the Income-tax Act for the year 1987-88. The Court emphasized the need for a substantial question of law for appeal under section 260A and found that the assessee failed to discharge the burden of explaining the discrepancies in the cash book, leading to the dismissal of the appeal.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Thu, 23 Mar 2000 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Tue, 04 Aug 2009 17:18:36 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=54322" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2000 (3) TMI 57 - KERALA High Court</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=15322</link>
      <description>The High Court upheld the Tribunal&#039;s decision to add Rs. 1,50,000 as income from other sources in the assessment under section 143(3) of the Income-tax Act for the year 1987-88. The Court emphasized the need for a substantial question of law for appeal under section 260A and found that the assessee failed to discharge the burden of explaining the discrepancies in the cash book, leading to the dismissal of the appeal.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Income Tax</law>
      <pubDate>Thu, 23 Mar 2000 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=15322</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>