<?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>Undisclosed Investment in Family Property Deemed Income; Court Upholds ITAT&#039;s Decision on Payment Disputes.</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/highlights?id=77735</link>
    <description>In the case before Punjab and Haryana High Court, undisclosed investment made to acquire rights in family property was deemed as undisclosed income for the block period. The revenue authorities found a receipt during search indicating the sister-in-law confirmed receiving the amount with no further payment due. The Income Tax Appellate Authority rejected the sister-in-law&#039;s certificate as biased towards the appellant. The court upheld the ITAT&#039;s decision that the property was handed over after full payment, supported by a demand draft receipt. The appellant&#039;s subsequent payments to the sister-in-law were not considered relevant as they were made after the search and without clear indication of settling the remaining amount. The appeal was dismissed, affirming the ITAT&#039;s order.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Thu, 23 May 2024 08:57:08 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Thu, 23 May 2024 11:41:52 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=754079" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>Undisclosed Investment in Family Property Deemed Income; Court Upholds ITAT&#039;s Decision on Payment Disputes.</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/highlights?id=77735</link>
      <description>In the case before Punjab and Haryana High Court, undisclosed investment made to acquire rights in family property was deemed as undisclosed income for the block period. The revenue authorities found a receipt during search indicating the sister-in-law confirmed receiving the amount with no further payment due. The Income Tax Appellate Authority rejected the sister-in-law&#039;s certificate as biased towards the appellant. The court upheld the ITAT&#039;s decision that the property was handed over after full payment, supported by a demand draft receipt. The appellant&#039;s subsequent payments to the sister-in-law were not considered relevant as they were made after the search and without clear indication of settling the remaining amount. The appeal was dismissed, affirming the ITAT&#039;s order.</description>
      <category>Highlights</category>
      <law>Income Tax</law>
      <pubDate>Thu, 23 May 2024 08:57:08 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/highlights?id=77735</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>