<?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 561 - ITAT CHENNAI</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=396186</link>
    <description>The Tribunal allowed the appeals, deleting the additions made under section 69C of the Income Tax Act for the assessment years 2013-14 and 2014-15. It held that the Assessing Officer&#039;s estimation of expenditure on agricultural income from coconut and mango trees was unjustified as no verification of tree numbers or irrigation usage was conducted. The Tribunal found the additions baseless and unwarranted, especially considering the lack of investments by the assessee.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Wed, 13 May 2020 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Wed, 24 Jun 2020 10:36:00 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=615854" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2020 (6) TMI 561 - ITAT CHENNAI</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=396186</link>
      <description>The Tribunal allowed the appeals, deleting the additions made under section 69C of the Income Tax Act for the assessment years 2013-14 and 2014-15. It held that the Assessing Officer&#039;s estimation of expenditure on agricultural income from coconut and mango trees was unjustified as no verification of tree numbers or irrigation usage was conducted. The Tribunal found the additions baseless and unwarranted, especially considering the lack of investments by the assessee.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Income Tax</law>
      <pubDate>Wed, 13 May 2020 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=396186</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>