<?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>Settlement Commission&#039;s Acceptance of Assessee&#039;s Declaration Valid as No Evidence Shows Undisclosed Income u/s 245D(4).</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/highlights?id=85220</link>
    <description>HC upheld Settlement Commission&#039;s order accepting assessee&#039;s settlement amount under s.245D(4). Commission determined assessee lacked direct involvement in land transactions generating undisclosed income. Despite documents found in third party&#039;s mobile phone, no additional disclosure required from assessee absent concrete evidence. Commission&#039;s acceptance of assessee&#039;s full disclosure declaration deemed valid, as no contrary evidence presented. Court found no jurisdictional error warranting interference under Art.227. Settlement Commission&#039;s factual findings regarding third party&#039;s responsibility to explain mobile documents upheld, rejecting presumptive additions without supporting evidence. Petition dismissed, maintaining Settlement Commission&#039;s original determination.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Tue, 28 Jan 2025 08:24:49 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Tue, 28 Jan 2025 08:24:50 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=792445" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>Settlement Commission&#039;s Acceptance of Assessee&#039;s Declaration Valid as No Evidence Shows Undisclosed Income u/s 245D(4).</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/highlights?id=85220</link>
      <description>HC upheld Settlement Commission&#039;s order accepting assessee&#039;s settlement amount under s.245D(4). Commission determined assessee lacked direct involvement in land transactions generating undisclosed income. Despite documents found in third party&#039;s mobile phone, no additional disclosure required from assessee absent concrete evidence. Commission&#039;s acceptance of assessee&#039;s full disclosure declaration deemed valid, as no contrary evidence presented. Court found no jurisdictional error warranting interference under Art.227. Settlement Commission&#039;s factual findings regarding third party&#039;s responsibility to explain mobile documents upheld, rejecting presumptive additions without supporting evidence. Petition dismissed, maintaining Settlement Commission&#039;s original determination.</description>
      <category>Highlights</category>
      <law>Income Tax</law>
      <pubDate>Tue, 28 Jan 2025 08:24:49 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/highlights?id=85220</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>