<?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 (10) TMI 625 - ITAT CHENNAI</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=429067</link>
    <description>The delay in filing the appeal was condoned due to reasonable cause, allowing the appeal to be adjudicated. Unexplained cash deposits in the assessee&#039;s bank account were treated as income, with the explanation of rental income being rejected for lack of evidence. The additions made by the Assessing Officer were upheld as the explanation provided was insufficient, leading to the dismissal of the appeal by the assessee.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Wed, 21 Sep 2022 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Mon, 17 Oct 2022 17:05:00 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=693526" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2022 (10) TMI 625 - ITAT CHENNAI</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=429067</link>
      <description>The delay in filing the appeal was condoned due to reasonable cause, allowing the appeal to be adjudicated. Unexplained cash deposits in the assessee&#039;s bank account were treated as income, with the explanation of rental income being rejected for lack of evidence. The additions made by the Assessing Officer were upheld as the explanation provided was insufficient, leading to the dismissal of the appeal by the assessee.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Income Tax</law>
      <pubDate>Wed, 21 Sep 2022 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=429067</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>