<?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 579 - ITAT CHENNAI</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=430155</link>
    <description>The Tribunal allowed the appeal, holding that the addition of Rs. 4,40,000 towards unexplained cash credit under section 68 of the Income Tax Act was unsustainable. The Tribunal found that the amount deposited in the bank was part of agricultural income retained by the assessee from the previous year, and the assessee had sufficiently explained the source of the deposit. Consequently, the Tribunal set aside the order confirming the addition and deleted the amount from the assessment.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Wed, 19 Oct 2022 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Sat, 12 Nov 2022 09:14:40 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=695625" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2022 (11) TMI 579 - ITAT CHENNAI</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=430155</link>
      <description>The Tribunal allowed the appeal, holding that the addition of Rs. 4,40,000 towards unexplained cash credit under section 68 of the Income Tax Act was unsustainable. The Tribunal found that the amount deposited in the bank was part of agricultural income retained by the assessee from the previous year, and the assessee had sufficiently explained the source of the deposit. Consequently, the Tribunal set aside the order confirming the addition and deleted the amount from the assessment.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Income Tax</law>
      <pubDate>Wed, 19 Oct 2022 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=430155</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>