<?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>1985 (8) TMI 95 - ITAT ALLAHABAD-A</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=56771</link>
    <description>The Tribunal dismissed both the assessee&#039;s and the Department&#039;s appeals, upholding the lower authorities&#039; findings. The return filed on 17th May, 1976, was deemed invalid under Section 139(5). Section 40A(3) was found not applicable due to lack of genuine transactions. The additions made by the ITO to the assessee&#039;s income were upheld as justified. The Tribunal&#039;s decision was based on a detailed analysis of the facts and legal aspects involved, affirming the lower authorities&#039; conclusions.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Tue, 20 Aug 1985 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Mon, 06 Dec 2010 16:37:09 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=95233" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>1985 (8) TMI 95 - ITAT ALLAHABAD-A</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=56771</link>
      <description>The Tribunal dismissed both the assessee&#039;s and the Department&#039;s appeals, upholding the lower authorities&#039; findings. The return filed on 17th May, 1976, was deemed invalid under Section 139(5). Section 40A(3) was found not applicable due to lack of genuine transactions. The additions made by the ITO to the assessee&#039;s income were upheld as justified. The Tribunal&#039;s decision was based on a detailed analysis of the facts and legal aspects involved, affirming the lower authorities&#039; conclusions.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Income Tax</law>
      <pubDate>Tue, 20 Aug 1985 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=56771</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>