<?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>2024 (8) TMI 1641 - ITAT JAIPUR</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=464406</link>
    <description>ITAT JAIPUR - AT affirmed the PCIT&#039;s revision under s.263, holding that excess stock disclosed by the assessee but shown as investment in the profit and loss account was unexplained for want of source and therefore liable under s.68 and taxable under s.115BBE. The Tribunal found the AO&#039;s assessment to be mechanically done without verifying explanations or records and rejected the assessee&#039;s reliance on differing case law. Ground No.2 raised by the assessee was dismissed and the PCIT&#039;s view confirmed.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Thu, 29 Aug 2024 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Tue, 28 Oct 2025 19:16:20 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=860684" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2024 (8) TMI 1641 - ITAT JAIPUR</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=464406</link>
      <description>ITAT JAIPUR - AT affirmed the PCIT&#039;s revision under s.263, holding that excess stock disclosed by the assessee but shown as investment in the profit and loss account was unexplained for want of source and therefore liable under s.68 and taxable under s.115BBE. The Tribunal found the AO&#039;s assessment to be mechanically done without verifying explanations or records and rejected the assessee&#039;s reliance on differing case law. Ground No.2 raised by the assessee was dismissed and the PCIT&#039;s view confirmed.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Income Tax</law>
      <pubDate>Thu, 29 Aug 2024 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=464406</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>