<?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 (10) TMI 1025 - ITAT DELHI</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=444802</link>
    <description>Seized electronic records in a search assessment were treated as reliable material despite objections on ownership of the laptop, alleged manipulation, and denial of cross-examination, so the additions were not struck down on admissibility grounds. The Tribunal also applied peak credit and telescoping to recurring debit and credit entries, holding that circulating funds should not be taxed twice and that embedded expenditure could not be separately added again. A commission income addition based on accommodation entry material was sustained because it was supported by the seized records and was distinct from the peak computation. The penalty under section 271(1)(c) did not survive to the extent the quantum additions were reduced or deleted.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Tue, 17 Oct 2023 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Sat, 21 Oct 2023 13:13:00 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=730015" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2023 (10) TMI 1025 - ITAT DELHI</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=444802</link>
      <description>Seized electronic records in a search assessment were treated as reliable material despite objections on ownership of the laptop, alleged manipulation, and denial of cross-examination, so the additions were not struck down on admissibility grounds. The Tribunal also applied peak credit and telescoping to recurring debit and credit entries, holding that circulating funds should not be taxed twice and that embedded expenditure could not be separately added again. A commission income addition based on accommodation entry material was sustained because it was supported by the seized records and was distinct from the peak computation. The penalty under section 271(1)(c) did not survive to the extent the quantum additions were reduced or deleted.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Income Tax</law>
      <pubDate>Tue, 17 Oct 2023 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=444802</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>