<?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 (10) TMI 882 - GUJARAT HIGH COURT</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=399908</link>
    <description>The High Court of Gujarat dismissed the Revenue&#039;s appeal under Section 260A of the Income Tax Act, 1961, regarding the deletion of addition under section 69 for unexplained investment in land for Assessment Year 2012-2013. The Court upheld the findings of the CIT(A) and the Appellate Tribunal, emphasizing the lack of conclusive evidence to support the addition. The decision underscored the importance of concrete evidence in tax matters and the requirement to prove undisclosed investments beyond assumptions.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Thu, 17 Sep 2020 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Thu, 22 Oct 2020 10:51:25 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=625858" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2020 (10) TMI 882 - GUJARAT HIGH COURT</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=399908</link>
      <description>The High Court of Gujarat dismissed the Revenue&#039;s appeal under Section 260A of the Income Tax Act, 1961, regarding the deletion of addition under section 69 for unexplained investment in land for Assessment Year 2012-2013. The Court upheld the findings of the CIT(A) and the Appellate Tribunal, emphasizing the lack of conclusive evidence to support the addition. The decision underscored the importance of concrete evidence in tax matters and the requirement to prove undisclosed investments beyond assumptions.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Income Tax</law>
      <pubDate>Thu, 17 Sep 2020 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=399908</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>