<?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>2018 (6) TMI 1741 - ITAT DELHI</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=293752</link>
    <description>The ITAT directed the Ld.CIT(A) to admit additional evidence related to unexplained cash deposits, emphasizing the importance of considering such evidence for a just decision. The additional evidence provided by the assessee, explaining the source of cash deposits, was found to be verifiable and supported by documents. The ITAT allowed the appeal for statistical purposes, setting aside the Ld.CIT(A)&#039;s order and highlighting the necessity of admitting relevant evidence in tax cases.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Tue, 19 Jun 2018 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Sun, 28 Feb 2021 09:35:23 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=637673" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2018 (6) TMI 1741 - ITAT DELHI</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=293752</link>
      <description>The ITAT directed the Ld.CIT(A) to admit additional evidence related to unexplained cash deposits, emphasizing the importance of considering such evidence for a just decision. The additional evidence provided by the assessee, explaining the source of cash deposits, was found to be verifiable and supported by documents. The ITAT allowed the appeal for statistical purposes, setting aside the Ld.CIT(A)&#039;s order and highlighting the necessity of admitting relevant evidence in tax cases.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Income Tax</law>
      <pubDate>Tue, 19 Jun 2018 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=293752</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>