<?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>2019 (10) TMI 1427 - ITAT DELHI</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=295140</link>
    <description>A supported reconciliation of sundry creditor balances can defeat an addition where the assessee explains the discrepancy with material on record, the purchases from those parties are not disallowed, and the trading results are accepted; on that basis, the addition was deleted. The text also notes that a departmental appeal is not maintainable when the tax effect falls below the CBDT monetary threshold, and the later clarification applies the enhanced limit even to pending appeals; the appeal was therefore dismissed.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Wed, 09 Oct 2019 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Thu, 20 May 2021 14:55:22 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=644726" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2019 (10) TMI 1427 - ITAT DELHI</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=295140</link>
      <description>A supported reconciliation of sundry creditor balances can defeat an addition where the assessee explains the discrepancy with material on record, the purchases from those parties are not disallowed, and the trading results are accepted; on that basis, the addition was deleted. The text also notes that a departmental appeal is not maintainable when the tax effect falls below the CBDT monetary threshold, and the later clarification applies the enhanced limit even to pending appeals; the appeal was therefore dismissed.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Income Tax</law>
      <pubDate>Wed, 09 Oct 2019 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=295140</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>