<?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>1996 (4) TMI 99 - RAJASTHAN High Court</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=18286</link>
    <description>The court upheld the additions made by the Income-tax Officer and Commissioner of Income-tax (Appeals) based on notings on a &#039;Jakad&#039; paper, totaling Rs. 50,500, for investments and earned profits outside the books. The Tribunal affirmed these findings, stating they were based on evidence and not perverse, refusing to interfere. The court declined to disturb the Tribunal&#039;s findings on ownership or investment under relevant sections of the Income-tax Act, emphasizing they were findings of fact. It also declined to challenge the presumption of unrecorded investments based on the &#039;Jakad&#039; slip, highlighting the importance of case-specific decisions and advising the Tribunal accordingly.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Thu, 18 Apr 1996 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Wed, 30 Sep 2009 10:38:14 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=57286" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>1996 (4) TMI 99 - RAJASTHAN High Court</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=18286</link>
      <description>The court upheld the additions made by the Income-tax Officer and Commissioner of Income-tax (Appeals) based on notings on a &#039;Jakad&#039; paper, totaling Rs. 50,500, for investments and earned profits outside the books. The Tribunal affirmed these findings, stating they were based on evidence and not perverse, refusing to interfere. The court declined to disturb the Tribunal&#039;s findings on ownership or investment under relevant sections of the Income-tax Act, emphasizing they were findings of fact. It also declined to challenge the presumption of unrecorded investments based on the &#039;Jakad&#039; slip, highlighting the importance of case-specific decisions and advising the Tribunal accordingly.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Income Tax</law>
      <pubDate>Thu, 18 Apr 1996 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=18286</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>