<?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 (3) TMI 1731 - BOMBAY HIGH COURT  </title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=286512</link>
    <description>In search-related assessments under section 153C read with section 143(3) of the Income-tax Act, additions under section 68 cannot be sustained unless supported by incriminating material found during the search. The Bombay High Court treated the issue as covered by binding precedent and applied that principle to hold that, where no such material exists, the additions lack legal basis and cannot stand. The Revenue&#039;s challenge therefore failed.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Wed, 06 Mar 2019 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Mon, 16 Mar 2020 17:19:00 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=605529" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2019 (3) TMI 1731 - BOMBAY HIGH COURT  </title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=286512</link>
      <description>In search-related assessments under section 153C read with section 143(3) of the Income-tax Act, additions under section 68 cannot be sustained unless supported by incriminating material found during the search. The Bombay High Court treated the issue as covered by binding precedent and applied that principle to hold that, where no such material exists, the additions lack legal basis and cannot stand. The Revenue&#039;s challenge therefore failed.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Income Tax</law>
      <pubDate>Wed, 06 Mar 2019 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=286512</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>