<?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>2012 (4) TMI 815 - ITAT CHANDIGARH</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=306450</link>
    <description>The Tribunal upheld the CIT(A)&#039;s decision to classify income as &#039;capital gains&#039; instead of &#039;business income&#039; and to delete the estimated income from real estate business. However, the Tribunal remanded the issue of the addition on account of investment made from undisclosed sources back to the AO for further adjudication and reinstated the addition for unexplained cash-in-hand, disagreeing with the CIT(A)&#039;s deletion of this amount.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Tue, 17 Apr 2012 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Tue, 31 Jan 2023 15:59:19 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=703175" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2012 (4) TMI 815 - ITAT CHANDIGARH</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=306450</link>
      <description>The Tribunal upheld the CIT(A)&#039;s decision to classify income as &#039;capital gains&#039; instead of &#039;business income&#039; and to delete the estimated income from real estate business. However, the Tribunal remanded the issue of the addition on account of investment made from undisclosed sources back to the AO for further adjudication and reinstated the addition for unexplained cash-in-hand, disagreeing with the CIT(A)&#039;s deletion of this amount.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Income Tax</law>
      <pubDate>Tue, 17 Apr 2012 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=306450</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>