<?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 (7) TMI 791 - ITAT CHANDIGARH</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=383095</link>
    <description>The Tribunal allowed the assessee&#039;s appeal against the addition of deemed income under section 69B, emphasizing the lack of evidence for unexplained investments and the Revenue&#039;s acceptance of capital gains based on registered documents. The decision highlighted the importance of corroborative evidence for such additions and noted inconsistencies in the Revenue&#039;s treatment of acquisition costs for the properties involved.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Tue, 07 May 2019 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Tue, 16 Jul 2019 12:08:00 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=579625" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2019 (7) TMI 791 - ITAT CHANDIGARH</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=383095</link>
      <description>The Tribunal allowed the assessee&#039;s appeal against the addition of deemed income under section 69B, emphasizing the lack of evidence for unexplained investments and the Revenue&#039;s acceptance of capital gains based on registered documents. The decision highlighted the importance of corroborative evidence for such additions and noted inconsistencies in the Revenue&#039;s treatment of acquisition costs for the properties involved.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Income Tax</law>
      <pubDate>Tue, 07 May 2019 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=383095</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>