<?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 1970 - ITAT JAIPUR</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=470062</link>
    <description>Appeals below the prescribed tax-effect threshold may proceed where the assessment falls within the specified exception for organised tax evasion involving penny-stock transactions, bogus gains or losses, or accommodation entries. The notes state that alleged National Spot Exchange and penny-stock transactions brought the Revenue&#039;s appeal within that exception, making it admissible on merits. Separately, an addition under Section 69 for unexplained investment is unsustainable where the taxpayer&#039;s investment is satisfactorily explained, the source is identified, and the alleged tax-evasion activity is not established factually. The deletion of the unexplained-investment addition was therefore sustained.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Thu, 13 Mar 2025 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Tue, 14 Jul 2026 19:02:57 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=911661" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2025 (3) TMI 1970 - ITAT JAIPUR</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=470062</link>
      <description>Appeals below the prescribed tax-effect threshold may proceed where the assessment falls within the specified exception for organised tax evasion involving penny-stock transactions, bogus gains or losses, or accommodation entries. The notes state that alleged National Spot Exchange and penny-stock transactions brought the Revenue&#039;s appeal within that exception, making it admissible on merits. Separately, an addition under Section 69 for unexplained investment is unsustainable where the taxpayer&#039;s investment is satisfactorily explained, the source is identified, and the alleged tax-evasion activity is not established factually. The deletion of the unexplained-investment addition was therefore sustained.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Income Tax</law>
      <pubDate>Thu, 13 Mar 2025 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=470062</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>