<?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>2019 (3) TMI 893 - ITAT DELHI</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=376872</link>
    <description>The Tribunal upheld the CIT(A)&#039;s decision to delete additions amounting to Rs. 1,90,59,000/- and Rs. 8,88,089/- based on the value stated in the sale document and lack of evidence of notional rental income. The CIT(A) concluded that the Revenue failed to prove understatement of consideration and the properties were held as stock-in-trade. The Tribunal affirmed the CIT(A)&#039;s findings, dismissing the Revenue&#039;s appeal and upholding the order pronounced on 13/03/2019.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Wed, 13 Mar 2019 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Sat, 16 Mar 2019 10:29:00 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=563247" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2019 (3) TMI 893 - ITAT DELHI</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=376872</link>
      <description>The Tribunal upheld the CIT(A)&#039;s decision to delete additions amounting to Rs. 1,90,59,000/- and Rs. 8,88,089/- based on the value stated in the sale document and lack of evidence of notional rental income. The CIT(A) concluded that the Revenue failed to prove understatement of consideration and the properties were held as stock-in-trade. The Tribunal affirmed the CIT(A)&#039;s findings, dismissing the Revenue&#039;s appeal and upholding the order pronounced on 13/03/2019.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Income Tax</law>
      <pubDate>Wed, 13 Mar 2019 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=376872</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>