<?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>2024 (9) TMI 1523 - MADRAS HIGH COURT</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=759279</link>
    <description>The tax appeal concerning the assessment year 2009-10 was partly allowed by the ITAT, attributing a portion of cash deposits to agricultural income due to insufficient evidence of other income sources. For the 2017-2018 assessment year, the court upheld the Tribunal&#039;s decision to treat cash deposits during demonetization as &quot;unexplained income,&quot; dismissing the appeal without costs, as no substantial questions of law were identified.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Mon, 02 Sep 2024 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Thu, 26 Sep 2024 10:53:00 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=770752" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2024 (9) TMI 1523 - MADRAS HIGH COURT</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=759279</link>
      <description>The tax appeal concerning the assessment year 2009-10 was partly allowed by the ITAT, attributing a portion of cash deposits to agricultural income due to insufficient evidence of other income sources. For the 2017-2018 assessment year, the court upheld the Tribunal&#039;s decision to treat cash deposits during demonetization as &quot;unexplained income,&quot; dismissing the appeal without costs, as no substantial questions of law were identified.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Income Tax</law>
      <pubDate>Mon, 02 Sep 2024 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=759279</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>