<?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 (6) TMI 897 - ITAT KOLKATA</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=424056</link>
    <description>The tribunal partially allowed the appeal, condoning the delay in filing, adjusting the addition of income by the Assessing Officer, and ruling that all cash deposits should be considered gross receipts from the profession, irrespective of timing. The tribunal held that post-demonetization deposits should be treated as business income, leading to the partial allowance of the overall appeal.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Fri, 17 Jun 2022 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Tue, 21 Jun 2022 08:57:19 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=682672" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2022 (6) TMI 897 - ITAT KOLKATA</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=424056</link>
      <description>The tribunal partially allowed the appeal, condoning the delay in filing, adjusting the addition of income by the Assessing Officer, and ruling that all cash deposits should be considered gross receipts from the profession, irrespective of timing. The tribunal held that post-demonetization deposits should be treated as business income, leading to the partial allowance of the overall appeal.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Income Tax</law>
      <pubDate>Fri, 17 Jun 2022 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=424056</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>