<?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>2020 (1) TMI 1660 - ITAT MUMBAI</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=310262</link>
    <description>The Tribunal dismissed the revenue&#039;s appeal, affirming the CIT(A)&#039;s order that the assessee satisfactorily explained the source of the jewellery, rendering the A.O.&#039;s addition under Section 69A unwarranted. The Tribunal upheld the partial addition of Rs. 24,68,722 as a fair estimation based on the facts.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Fri, 17 Jan 2020 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Sun, 15 Oct 2023 15:33:17 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=729207" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2020 (1) TMI 1660 - ITAT MUMBAI</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=310262</link>
      <description>The Tribunal dismissed the revenue&#039;s appeal, affirming the CIT(A)&#039;s order that the assessee satisfactorily explained the source of the jewellery, rendering the A.O.&#039;s addition under Section 69A unwarranted. The Tribunal upheld the partial addition of Rs. 24,68,722 as a fair estimation based on the facts.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Income Tax</law>
      <pubDate>Fri, 17 Jan 2020 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=310262</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>