<?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>2026 (1) TMI 755 - ITAT KOLKATA</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=784999</link>
    <description>Challenge to denial of exemption under section 10(26AAA) turned on domicile and entitlement of old settlers of Sikkim; SC held earlier exclusion arbitrary and violative of equality, directing old settlers be treated par pari, and Parliament enacted a retrospective explanatory amendment extending benefit to individuals domiciled in Sikkim on or before the cut-off date, resulting in allowance of exemption. Unexplained cash credit characterised as a gift from a relative was substantiated by donor accounts and ledger evidence and remitted for fresh consideration. Penalty under section 271D for alleged breach of section 269SS was deleted as transactions were book adjustments without cash movement.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Tue, 13 Jan 2026 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Thu, 15 Jan 2026 08:41:24 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=878505" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2026 (1) TMI 755 - ITAT KOLKATA</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=784999</link>
      <description>Challenge to denial of exemption under section 10(26AAA) turned on domicile and entitlement of old settlers of Sikkim; SC held earlier exclusion arbitrary and violative of equality, directing old settlers be treated par pari, and Parliament enacted a retrospective explanatory amendment extending benefit to individuals domiciled in Sikkim on or before the cut-off date, resulting in allowance of exemption. Unexplained cash credit characterised as a gift from a relative was substantiated by donor accounts and ledger evidence and remitted for fresh consideration. Penalty under section 271D for alleged breach of section 269SS was deleted as transactions were book adjustments without cash movement.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Income Tax</law>
      <pubDate>Tue, 13 Jan 2026 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=784999</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>