<?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>1986 (8) TMI 118 - ITAT CHANDIGARH</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=61377</link>
    <description>Unverifiable sales, stock discrepancies, bardana shortages, and incomplete day-to-day records justified rejection of the books as unreliable, so a trading addition was sustained in part. Cash credits were also upheld as unexplained because the assessee did not prove the source, genuineness, or supporting confirmations for the impugned amounts, leaving the burden under section 68 undischarged. Issues concerning partner remuneration and allocation of interest in individual and representative capacities required further factual and legal examination, so they were remanded for fresh adjudication. The assessment was otherwise left undisturbed, with relief granted only to the limited extent of remand.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Fri, 29 Aug 1986 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Wed, 12 Jan 2011 14:16:37 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=99824" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>1986 (8) TMI 118 - ITAT CHANDIGARH</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=61377</link>
      <description>Unverifiable sales, stock discrepancies, bardana shortages, and incomplete day-to-day records justified rejection of the books as unreliable, so a trading addition was sustained in part. Cash credits were also upheld as unexplained because the assessee did not prove the source, genuineness, or supporting confirmations for the impugned amounts, leaving the burden under section 68 undischarged. Issues concerning partner remuneration and allocation of interest in individual and representative capacities required further factual and legal examination, so they were remanded for fresh adjudication. The assessment was otherwise left undisturbed, with relief granted only to the limited extent of remand.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Income Tax</law>
      <pubDate>Fri, 29 Aug 1986 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=61377</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>