<?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>Tax Tribunal Upholds CIT(A) Decision on Unexplained Investments; Additional Evidence Validates Source of Funds.</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/highlights?id=73819</link>
    <description>CIT(A) admitting additional evidence and deleted addition - Best judgment assessment - addition were made u/s 69B based on unexplained investment in time deposits - since the CIT(A) has returned a finding of fact with regard to the source of funds that were found deposited in the period in issue, no interference is called for as these findings have been affirmed by the Tribunal as well. - HC</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Thu, 28 Dec 2023 13:34:24 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Thu, 28 Dec 2023 13:34:24 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=737574" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>Tax Tribunal Upholds CIT(A) Decision on Unexplained Investments; Additional Evidence Validates Source of Funds.</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/highlights?id=73819</link>
      <description>CIT(A) admitting additional evidence and deleted addition - Best judgment assessment - addition were made u/s 69B based on unexplained investment in time deposits - since the CIT(A) has returned a finding of fact with regard to the source of funds that were found deposited in the period in issue, no interference is called for as these findings have been affirmed by the Tribunal as well. - HC</description>
      <category>Highlights</category>
      <law>Income Tax</law>
      <pubDate>Thu, 28 Dec 2023 13:34:24 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/highlights?id=73819</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>