<?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>2025 (2) TMI 600 - ITAT AHMEDABAD</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=766054</link>
    <description>Cash deposits were treated as explained on the facts because the assessee supported them with pension receipts, prior cash withdrawals, medical exigencies and sale consideration from property and related assets. The Tribunal found that the lower authorities had not properly considered this explanation, so the addition under section 69A was not sustained and the consequential application of section 115BBE also failed.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Fri, 07 Feb 2025 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Mon, 17 Feb 2025 08:48:32 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=798681" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2025 (2) TMI 600 - ITAT AHMEDABAD</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=766054</link>
      <description>Cash deposits were treated as explained on the facts because the assessee supported them with pension receipts, prior cash withdrawals, medical exigencies and sale consideration from property and related assets. The Tribunal found that the lower authorities had not properly considered this explanation, so the addition under section 69A was not sustained and the consequential application of section 115BBE also failed.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Income Tax</law>
      <pubDate>Fri, 07 Feb 2025 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=766054</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>