<?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 (12) TMI 1558 - ITAT KOLKATA</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=372789</link>
    <description>The tribunal upheld the deletion of the addition of Rs. 1,89,34,232/- made by the Assessing Officer on account of unexplained cash credits, finding the amount represented realizations from sundry debtors for supplies made in earlier years. The tribunal emphasized the lack of external evidence to corroborate the cash deposits but allowed the deduction for bad debts under Section 36(1)(vii), following a similar precedent. Consequently, the tribunal dismissed the revenue&#039;s appeal, granting relief to the assessee.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Wed, 12 Dec 2018 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Sat, 29 Dec 2018 11:33:34 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=549976" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2018 (12) TMI 1558 - ITAT KOLKATA</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=372789</link>
      <description>The tribunal upheld the deletion of the addition of Rs. 1,89,34,232/- made by the Assessing Officer on account of unexplained cash credits, finding the amount represented realizations from sundry debtors for supplies made in earlier years. The tribunal emphasized the lack of external evidence to corroborate the cash deposits but allowed the deduction for bad debts under Section 36(1)(vii), following a similar precedent. Consequently, the tribunal dismissed the revenue&#039;s appeal, granting relief to the assessee.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Income Tax</law>
      <pubDate>Wed, 12 Dec 2018 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=372789</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>