<?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>2023 (4) TMI 555 - ITAT BANGALORE</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=436529</link>
    <description>The ITAT allowed the appeal of the assessee, directing the deletion of the addition of Rs.5,90,900/- to the total income. The ITAT held that Section 142A did not apply to a purchased house, and the AO failed to prove unrecorded investments, making the addition under Section 69 unsustainable.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Thu, 24 Nov 2022 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Sat, 15 Apr 2023 08:51:25 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=710751" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2023 (4) TMI 555 - ITAT BANGALORE</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=436529</link>
      <description>The ITAT allowed the appeal of the assessee, directing the deletion of the addition of Rs.5,90,900/- to the total income. The ITAT held that Section 142A did not apply to a purchased house, and the AO failed to prove unrecorded investments, making the addition under Section 69 unsustainable.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Income Tax</law>
      <pubDate>Thu, 24 Nov 2022 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=436529</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>