<?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>Additional evidence before the Tribunal was properly admitted, leaving cash-credit findings immune from further legal challenge.</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/highlights?id=104115</link>
    <description>Additional evidence before the Tribunal may be filed under Rule 18(4) of the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal Rules, 1963 through a separate paper book supported by an application explaining the reasons. The High Court upheld admission of records retrieved after loss, damage or soiling, particularly because the Assessing Officer had incorrectly recorded that no material was produced. The Tribunal&#039;s findings on unexplained cash credits and trading liabilities were based on confirmations, transaction details, tax-deduction certificates, books of account and bank records. As reasoned factual findings disclosed no perversity, no substantial question of law arose and the Revenue&#039;s appeal was dismissed.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Thu, 24 Sep 2026 08:27:07 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Thu, 24 Sep 2026 08:27:12 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=925405" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>Additional evidence before the Tribunal was properly admitted, leaving cash-credit findings immune from further legal challenge.</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/highlights?id=104115</link>
      <description>Additional evidence before the Tribunal may be filed under Rule 18(4) of the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal Rules, 1963 through a separate paper book supported by an application explaining the reasons. The High Court upheld admission of records retrieved after loss, damage or soiling, particularly because the Assessing Officer had incorrectly recorded that no material was produced. The Tribunal&#039;s findings on unexplained cash credits and trading liabilities were based on confirmations, transaction details, tax-deduction certificates, books of account and bank records. As reasoned factual findings disclosed no perversity, no substantial question of law arose and the Revenue&#039;s appeal was dismissed.</description>
      <category>Highlights</category>
      <law>Income Tax</law>
      <pubDate>Thu, 24 Sep 2026 08:27:07 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/highlights?id=104115</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>