<?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>2017 (9) TMI 1919 - ITAT MUMBAI</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=293912</link>
    <description>The tribunal allowed the appeal of the assessee for the assessment year 2011-12, concluding that the additions made by the Assessing Officer and partly upheld by the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) could not be sustained due to the lack of cross-examination and insufficient evidence to prove the purchases were bogus. The tribunal ordered the deletion of the addition, referencing relevant case law, and the order was pronounced on 1st September 2017.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Fri, 01 Sep 2017 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Tue, 09 Mar 2021 08:45:51 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=638349" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2017 (9) TMI 1919 - ITAT MUMBAI</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=293912</link>
      <description>The tribunal allowed the appeal of the assessee for the assessment year 2011-12, concluding that the additions made by the Assessing Officer and partly upheld by the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) could not be sustained due to the lack of cross-examination and insufficient evidence to prove the purchases were bogus. The tribunal ordered the deletion of the addition, referencing relevant case law, and the order was pronounced on 1st September 2017.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Income Tax</law>
      <pubDate>Fri, 01 Sep 2017 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=293912</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>