<?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 (6) TMI 32 - PUNJAB AND HARYANA HIGH COURT</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=395657</link>
    <description>The court dismissed the appeal, ruling against the disallowance under Section 36(1)(iii) of the Income Tax Act. The Assessing Officer&#039;s additions were deleted as the source of funds for advances was proven. Share capital received from companies was not deemed accommodation entries, as profitability and funding sources were verified. Precedents were cited to support the decision, ultimately leading to the dismissal of the appeal.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Thu, 16 Jan 2020 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Mon, 01 Jun 2020 09:42:48 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=614131" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2020 (6) TMI 32 - PUNJAB AND HARYANA HIGH COURT</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=395657</link>
      <description>The court dismissed the appeal, ruling against the disallowance under Section 36(1)(iii) of the Income Tax Act. The Assessing Officer&#039;s additions were deleted as the source of funds for advances was proven. Share capital received from companies was not deemed accommodation entries, as profitability and funding sources were verified. Precedents were cited to support the decision, ultimately leading to the dismissal of the appeal.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Income Tax</law>
      <pubDate>Thu, 16 Jan 2020 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=395657</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>