<?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>2022 (2) TMI 1088 - ITAT MUMBAI</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=418837</link>
    <description>The Tribunal upheld the CIT(A)&#039;s decision to delete the addition under Section 68 of the Income Tax Act, as the assessee provided sufficient evidence to establish the genuineness of the transaction. The Tribunal dismissed the revenue&#039;s appeal and considered the assessee&#039;s challenge to the validity of the reopening as infructuous, ultimately ruling in favor of the assessee.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Thu, 17 Feb 2022 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Fri, 25 Feb 2022 08:34:42 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=671231" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2022 (2) TMI 1088 - ITAT MUMBAI</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=418837</link>
      <description>The Tribunal upheld the CIT(A)&#039;s decision to delete the addition under Section 68 of the Income Tax Act, as the assessee provided sufficient evidence to establish the genuineness of the transaction. The Tribunal dismissed the revenue&#039;s appeal and considered the assessee&#039;s challenge to the validity of the reopening as infructuous, ultimately ruling in favor of the assessee.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Income Tax</law>
      <pubDate>Thu, 17 Feb 2022 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=418837</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>