<?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 (6) TMI 485 - ITAT DELHI</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=772372</link>
    <description>Cash found and seized from an assessee&#039;s locker during search proceedings was treated as unexplained money under section 69A because the explanation that it belonged to M/s. Shree Balaji Trading Company was rejected by the Assessing Officer and CIT(A). On appeal, the ITAT Delhi found no contrary material to dislodge the concurrent factual findings of the lower authorities. The addition was therefore upheld and the challenge to the unexplained-money assessment failed.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Wed, 28 May 2025 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Sat, 07 Jun 2025 08:32:50 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=827435" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2025 (6) TMI 485 - ITAT DELHI</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=772372</link>
      <description>Cash found and seized from an assessee&#039;s locker during search proceedings was treated as unexplained money under section 69A because the explanation that it belonged to M/s. Shree Balaji Trading Company was rejected by the Assessing Officer and CIT(A). On appeal, the ITAT Delhi found no contrary material to dislodge the concurrent factual findings of the lower authorities. The addition was therefore upheld and the challenge to the unexplained-money assessment failed.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Income Tax</law>
      <pubDate>Wed, 28 May 2025 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=772372</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>