<?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 (4) TMI 1799 - ITAT DELHI</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=284947</link>
    <description>The Tribunal set aside the CIT(A)&#039;s order and restored the Assessing Officer&#039;s addition of Rs. 1.17 crores under Section 68 of the Income Tax Act. The Tribunal held that the assessee failed to prove the creditworthiness of the investors and the genuineness of the transactions, supporting the Revenue&#039;s appeal.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Thu, 18 Apr 2019 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Wed, 18 Dec 2019 10:02:44 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=597610" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2019 (4) TMI 1799 - ITAT DELHI</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=284947</link>
      <description>The Tribunal set aside the CIT(A)&#039;s order and restored the Assessing Officer&#039;s addition of Rs. 1.17 crores under Section 68 of the Income Tax Act. The Tribunal held that the assessee failed to prove the creditworthiness of the investors and the genuineness of the transactions, supporting the Revenue&#039;s appeal.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Income Tax</law>
      <pubDate>Thu, 18 Apr 2019 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=284947</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>