<?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 (8) TMI 1117 - ITAT KOLKATA</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=384928</link>
    <description>The Tribunal allowed the appeal, directing the AO to delete the addition made under section 68 of the Income-tax Act. It held that the assessee&#039;s transactions were genuine, supported by valid documentation, and the LTCG exemption under section 10(38) was rightly claimed. The Tribunal emphasized the importance of concrete evidence over suspicion or general reports to justify such additions.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Wed, 21 Aug 2019 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Mon, 26 Aug 2019 17:34:00 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=584901" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2019 (8) TMI 1117 - ITAT KOLKATA</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=384928</link>
      <description>The Tribunal allowed the appeal, directing the AO to delete the addition made under section 68 of the Income-tax Act. It held that the assessee&#039;s transactions were genuine, supported by valid documentation, and the LTCG exemption under section 10(38) was rightly claimed. The Tribunal emphasized the importance of concrete evidence over suspicion or general reports to justify such additions.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Income Tax</law>
      <pubDate>Wed, 21 Aug 2019 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=384928</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>