<?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 (5) TMI 360 - ITAT LUCKNOW</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=422100</link>
    <description>The ITAT allowed the appeal filed by the assessee, overturning the CIT(A) order confirming the addition of Rs. 2,00,000 for cash deposits during demonetization. The ITAT found the sustained addition unjustified as the assessee had already deducted Rs. 2,92,870 for household expenses, leading to the deletion of the Rs. 2,00,000 addition.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Tue, 12 Apr 2022 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Sun, 08 May 2022 16:26:00 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=678506" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2022 (5) TMI 360 - ITAT LUCKNOW</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=422100</link>
      <description>The ITAT allowed the appeal filed by the assessee, overturning the CIT(A) order confirming the addition of Rs. 2,00,000 for cash deposits during demonetization. The ITAT found the sustained addition unjustified as the assessee had already deducted Rs. 2,92,870 for household expenses, leading to the deletion of the Rs. 2,00,000 addition.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Income Tax</law>
      <pubDate>Tue, 12 Apr 2022 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=422100</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>