<?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 (3) TMI 1931 - ITAT DELHI</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=469977</link>
    <description>An appeal filed within 30 days of service of the assessment order could not be treated as time-barred, particularly where the Revenue did not oppose the delay plea. Bank deposits could not be added as unexplained income when the assessee had disclosed the relevant business receipts under presumptive taxation and the business character of those receipts was not disputed. On those facts, the limitation objection failed and the addition was deleted.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Wed, 12 Mar 2025 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Fri, 10 Jul 2026 22:36:09 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=911105" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2025 (3) TMI 1931 - ITAT DELHI</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=469977</link>
      <description>An appeal filed within 30 days of service of the assessment order could not be treated as time-barred, particularly where the Revenue did not oppose the delay plea. Bank deposits could not be added as unexplained income when the assessee had disclosed the relevant business receipts under presumptive taxation and the business character of those receipts was not disputed. On those facts, the limitation objection failed and the addition was deleted.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Income Tax</law>
      <pubDate>Wed, 12 Mar 2025 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=469977</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>