<?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 (7) TMI 1740 - ITAT AHMEDABAD</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=466345</link>
    <description>Initiation of assessment proceedings under the amended provision governing search-derived cases was held time-barred because the satisfaction note was recorded after the amendment&#039;s effective date, so the subsequent notice lacked jurisdiction and the ground was allowed. Additions that did not originate from incriminating material seized were disallowed where the Assessing Officer failed to provide relied material or permit cross-examination and made no independent inquiry. Rejection of books and an estimated profit addition based on a 12% rate were also disapproved for an unabated assessment year because they were founded on estimation and not solely on seized evidence. The appeal was allowed.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Tue, 16 Jul 2024 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Sun, 01 Feb 2026 11:38:11 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=883660" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2024 (7) TMI 1740 - ITAT AHMEDABAD</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=466345</link>
      <description>Initiation of assessment proceedings under the amended provision governing search-derived cases was held time-barred because the satisfaction note was recorded after the amendment&#039;s effective date, so the subsequent notice lacked jurisdiction and the ground was allowed. Additions that did not originate from incriminating material seized were disallowed where the Assessing Officer failed to provide relied material or permit cross-examination and made no independent inquiry. Rejection of books and an estimated profit addition based on a 12% rate were also disapproved for an unabated assessment year because they were founded on estimation and not solely on seized evidence. The appeal was allowed.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Income Tax</law>
      <pubDate>Tue, 16 Jul 2024 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=466345</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>