<?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 (12) TMI 686 - ITAT VISAKHAPATNAM</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=389803</link>
    <description>The Tribunal remitted the matter back to the AO for reconsideration of additions related to on-money received on the sale of flats, directing estimation of only profits. Estimations of profit at 8% were deemed sufficient under Section 44AD. The addition towards unexplained investment in property was deleted as the source was disclosed in the partner&#039;s balance sheet. Other additions for unexplained expenditure and undisclosed contract receipts were upheld as the assessee failed to provide satisfactory explanations. Appeals were partly allowed for statistical purposes, and stay applications were dismissed. The AO was directed to reassess certain additions based on evidence provided by the assessee.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Wed, 11 Dec 2019 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Tue, 17 Dec 2019 15:56:41 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=597552" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2019 (12) TMI 686 - ITAT VISAKHAPATNAM</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=389803</link>
      <description>The Tribunal remitted the matter back to the AO for reconsideration of additions related to on-money received on the sale of flats, directing estimation of only profits. Estimations of profit at 8% were deemed sufficient under Section 44AD. The addition towards unexplained investment in property was deleted as the source was disclosed in the partner&#039;s balance sheet. Other additions for unexplained expenditure and undisclosed contract receipts were upheld as the assessee failed to provide satisfactory explanations. Appeals were partly allowed for statistical purposes, and stay applications were dismissed. The AO was directed to reassess certain additions based on evidence provided by the assessee.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Income Tax</law>
      <pubDate>Wed, 11 Dec 2019 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=389803</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>