<?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 (11) TMI 10 - ITAT VISAKHAPATNAM</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=429586</link>
    <description>The Tribunal upheld the addition of Rs. 73 lakhs as cash deposits during demonetization, concluding that the appellant failed to substantiate the source of the deposits adequately. The Tribunal found discrepancies in the appellant&#039;s trading account and lack of evidence supporting cash sales, ultimately dismissing the appeal and affirming the Revenue Authorities&#039; decision.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Thu, 13 Oct 2022 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Mon, 31 Oct 2022 13:16:00 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=694494" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2022 (11) TMI 10 - ITAT VISAKHAPATNAM</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=429586</link>
      <description>The Tribunal upheld the addition of Rs. 73 lakhs as cash deposits during demonetization, concluding that the appellant failed to substantiate the source of the deposits adequately. The Tribunal found discrepancies in the appellant&#039;s trading account and lack of evidence supporting cash sales, ultimately dismissing the appeal and affirming the Revenue Authorities&#039; decision.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Income Tax</law>
      <pubDate>Thu, 13 Oct 2022 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=429586</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>