<?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 (8) TMI 451 - ITAT CHENNAI</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=426212</link>
    <description>The Tribunal dismissed the appeals filed by the assessee due to the failure to provide evidence for the source of cash deposits, resulting in the confirmation of the additions as unexplained money under section 69A of the Income Tax Act. The Tribunal upheld the orders of the CIT(A) based on the lack of substantiating evidence and the failure to prove the business nature of the transactions in question.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Wed, 03 Aug 2022 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Wed, 10 Aug 2022 09:28:57 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=687614" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2022 (8) TMI 451 - ITAT CHENNAI</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=426212</link>
      <description>The Tribunal dismissed the appeals filed by the assessee due to the failure to provide evidence for the source of cash deposits, resulting in the confirmation of the additions as unexplained money under section 69A of the Income Tax Act. The Tribunal upheld the orders of the CIT(A) based on the lack of substantiating evidence and the failure to prove the business nature of the transactions in question.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Income Tax</law>
      <pubDate>Wed, 03 Aug 2022 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=426212</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>