<?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>2021 (8) TMI 898 - ITAT MUMBAI</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=411320</link>
    <description>The Tribunal allowed the appeal, directing the AO to delete the additions made under section 2(22)(e) due to the absence of incriminating material and the genuine nature of the business transactions. The Tribunal emphasized verifying the appellant&#039;s claims using available evidence and overturned the CIT(A)&#039;s decision.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Tue, 27 Jul 2021 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Mon, 23 Aug 2021 08:38:00 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=653631" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2021 (8) TMI 898 - ITAT MUMBAI</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=411320</link>
      <description>The Tribunal allowed the appeal, directing the AO to delete the additions made under section 2(22)(e) due to the absence of incriminating material and the genuine nature of the business transactions. The Tribunal emphasized verifying the appellant&#039;s claims using available evidence and overturned the CIT(A)&#039;s decision.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Income Tax</law>
      <pubDate>Tue, 27 Jul 2021 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=411320</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>