<?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>2020 (2) TMI 28 - ITAT BANGALORE</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=391584</link>
    <description>The Tribunal concluded that the Assessing Officer lacked sufficient evidence to support the addition under section 50C of the Income Tax Act. It was found that the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) erred in affirming the Assessing Officer&#039;s decision. Consequently, the Tribunal deleted the addition of Rs. 10,72,000 and ruled in favor of the assessee in the appeal.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Thu, 30 Jan 2020 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Fri, 31 Jan 2020 21:20:00 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=602113" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2020 (2) TMI 28 - ITAT BANGALORE</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=391584</link>
      <description>The Tribunal concluded that the Assessing Officer lacked sufficient evidence to support the addition under section 50C of the Income Tax Act. It was found that the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) erred in affirming the Assessing Officer&#039;s decision. Consequently, the Tribunal deleted the addition of Rs. 10,72,000 and ruled in favor of the assessee in the appeal.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Income Tax</law>
      <pubDate>Thu, 30 Jan 2020 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=391584</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>