<?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 (9) TMI 154 - MADRAS HIGH COURT</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=385386</link>
    <description>The High Court upheld the Tribunal&#039;s decision regarding the appellant&#039;s appeal challenging the assessment under the Income Tax Act. The Court found that the unaccounted cash deposits constituted unexplained income under Section 69 of the Act, emphasizing the lack of verifiable evidence linking the deposits to business turnover. Additionally, the Court agreed with the Tribunal&#039;s assessment that purchases and expenses were adequately recorded, dismissing the appellant&#039;s arguments on the net profit ratio. The Court reiterated the significance of evidence in determining tax liability and declined to reexamine the facts, ultimately dismissing the appeal.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Tue, 16 Jul 2019 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Wed, 04 Sep 2019 09:24:13 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=585968" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2019 (9) TMI 154 - MADRAS HIGH COURT</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=385386</link>
      <description>The High Court upheld the Tribunal&#039;s decision regarding the appellant&#039;s appeal challenging the assessment under the Income Tax Act. The Court found that the unaccounted cash deposits constituted unexplained income under Section 69 of the Act, emphasizing the lack of verifiable evidence linking the deposits to business turnover. Additionally, the Court agreed with the Tribunal&#039;s assessment that purchases and expenses were adequately recorded, dismissing the appellant&#039;s arguments on the net profit ratio. The Court reiterated the significance of evidence in determining tax liability and declined to reexamine the facts, ultimately dismissing the appeal.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Income Tax</law>
      <pubDate>Tue, 16 Jul 2019 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=385386</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>