<?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 (3) TMI 1281 - ITAT DELHI</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=420243</link>
    <description>The Tribunal upheld the First Appellate Authority&#039;s decision to delete the addition of Rs. 4 crores as unexplained cash credit, ruling that the entry was fictitious and did not involve actual funds. The Tribunal emphasized the significance of actual fund flow in determining tax liability under Section 68 of the Income Tax Act, ultimately dismissing the revenue&#039;s appeal.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Fri, 25 Mar 2022 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Wed, 30 Mar 2022 08:33:50 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=674377" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2022 (3) TMI 1281 - ITAT DELHI</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=420243</link>
      <description>The Tribunal upheld the First Appellate Authority&#039;s decision to delete the addition of Rs. 4 crores as unexplained cash credit, ruling that the entry was fictitious and did not involve actual funds. The Tribunal emphasized the significance of actual fund flow in determining tax liability under Section 68 of the Income Tax Act, ultimately dismissing the revenue&#039;s appeal.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Income Tax</law>
      <pubDate>Fri, 25 Mar 2022 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=420243</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>