<?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>Taxpayer Wins Capital Gains and Unexplained Money Dispute, Tribunal Rejects Revenue&#039;s Appeal on Statutory Grounds</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/highlights?id=89234</link>
    <description>ITAT adjudicated a tax dispute involving two primary issues: long-term capital gains (LTCG) and unexplained money. Regarding LTCG, the tribunal rejected the Assessing Officer&#039;s attempt to refer the matter to the Departmental Valuation Officer, finding no statutory support for such action. On the unexplained money issue, the tribunal upheld the CIT(A)&#039;s decision, confirming that the assessee adequately explained the source of bank deposits. Consequently, the tribunal dismissed the revenue&#039;s appeal on both grounds, ruling in favor of the assessee and maintaining the CIT(A)&#039;s original order.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Mon, 09 Jun 2025 07:29:45 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Mon, 09 Jun 2025 07:29:47 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=827746" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>Taxpayer Wins Capital Gains and Unexplained Money Dispute, Tribunal Rejects Revenue&#039;s Appeal on Statutory Grounds</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/highlights?id=89234</link>
      <description>ITAT adjudicated a tax dispute involving two primary issues: long-term capital gains (LTCG) and unexplained money. Regarding LTCG, the tribunal rejected the Assessing Officer&#039;s attempt to refer the matter to the Departmental Valuation Officer, finding no statutory support for such action. On the unexplained money issue, the tribunal upheld the CIT(A)&#039;s decision, confirming that the assessee adequately explained the source of bank deposits. Consequently, the tribunal dismissed the revenue&#039;s appeal on both grounds, ruling in favor of the assessee and maintaining the CIT(A)&#039;s original order.</description>
      <category>Highlights</category>
      <law>Income Tax</law>
      <pubDate>Mon, 09 Jun 2025 07:29:45 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/highlights?id=89234</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>