<?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 861 - ITAT RAIPUR</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=766314</link>
    <description>ITAT Raipur upheld CIT(A)&#039;s decision to delete additions under section 68 for unexplained cash credit. The tribunal found that CIT(A) properly considered additional evidence submitted by the assessee, which followed prescribed procedures and was forwarded to AO who failed to respond despite reminders. The tribunal ruled that CIT(A) had justifiable reasons for accepting the additional evidence that could not be furnished before AO. Appeal decided against revenue.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Thu, 09 Jan 2025 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Mon, 02 Mar 2026 12:46:00 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=800562" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2025 (2) TMI 861 - ITAT RAIPUR</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=766314</link>
      <description>ITAT Raipur upheld CIT(A)&#039;s decision to delete additions under section 68 for unexplained cash credit. The tribunal found that CIT(A) properly considered additional evidence submitted by the assessee, which followed prescribed procedures and was forwarded to AO who failed to respond despite reminders. The tribunal ruled that CIT(A) had justifiable reasons for accepting the additional evidence that could not be furnished before AO. Appeal decided against revenue.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Income Tax</law>
      <pubDate>Thu, 09 Jan 2025 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=766314</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>