<?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>1990 (10) TMI 385 - PATNA HIGH COURT</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=294838</link>
    <description>An assessee&#039;s cash credit was accepted as satisfactorily explained where the creditor was found to have sufficient funds to advance the amount, and that factual finding was upheld by the Tribunal. Subsequent reopening of the creditor&#039;s assessment and further enquiry did not displace the conclusion that the assessee had adequately explained the credit. The Tribunal was therefore right in sustaining deletion of the addition.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Wed, 31 Oct 1990 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Wed, 05 May 2021 17:11:08 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=643568" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>1990 (10) TMI 385 - PATNA HIGH COURT</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=294838</link>
      <description>An assessee&#039;s cash credit was accepted as satisfactorily explained where the creditor was found to have sufficient funds to advance the amount, and that factual finding was upheld by the Tribunal. Subsequent reopening of the creditor&#039;s assessment and further enquiry did not displace the conclusion that the assessee had adequately explained the credit. The Tribunal was therefore right in sustaining deletion of the addition.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Income Tax</law>
      <pubDate>Wed, 31 Oct 1990 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=294838</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>