Category: Income-Tax Act

Archive for the ‘Income-Tax Act’ Category


Tata Power Delhi Distribution Ltd. v.Add. CIT (2023)108 ITR 329 (Delhi)(Trib.)

S. 80IA : Industrial undertakings-Enterprises engaged in infrastructure development-Late payment surcharge and rebate on power of purchase-Receipts having nexus with profits-Eligible for deduction-Addition made to income of eligible unit-Eligible for deduction in respect of sums added. Central Board Of Direct Taxes Circular No. 37 Of 2016, Dated 2-11-2016.

Kirti Singh v. Asst. CIT (2023)108 ITR 71 (SN)/(2024) 204 ITD 487 (Delhi) (Trib)

S. 69A : Unexplained money-High net worth individuals-Sufficiently demonstrating plausibility for holding gold ornaments in excess of limit prescribed by Board’s Instruction-Credit to be given for gold, jewellery and ornaments held in custody of Assessee on behalf of sister-in-law-Addition is deleted. [S. 132]

Dy. CIT v.Tapesh Tyagi (2023)108 ITR 12 (SN)(Delhi) (Trib)

S. 69A : Unexplained money-Search-loose papers-Commodity trade-Recharacterising nature of income offered by assessee-Surrendered income cannot be treated as unexplained money-Provision of section 115BBE cannot be applied.[S. 68, 69, 69A, 69B, 69C 69D, 115BBE]

Dy. CIT v. Creamy Foods Ltd. (2023)108 ITR 66 (SN)(Delhi)(Trib)

S. 69A : Unexplained money-Search and seizure-Cash belonging to two concerns not functioning from same premises-Could not be considered in hands of assessee-Deletion of addition is proper

Adim Jati Seva Sahkari Samiti Maryadit v. ITO (2023)108 ITR 645 (Raipur) (Trib)

S. 69A : Unexplained money-Cash deposit-Demonetisation period-Not explained the source of fund-Addition is affirmed.

Abrar Fakirmohmmad Shaikh v. ITO (IT) (2023)108 ITR 127 /226 TTJ 721(Pune) (Trib)

S. 69A : Unexplained money-Cash deposits from withdrawals-Addition is deleted. [S.92CA, 144C]

Tejinder Singh v.ITO (2023)108 ITR 50 (SN)(Chd) (Trib)

S. 68: Cash credits —Amount deposited on account of sale of agricultural produce-Department could not rebut arguments of Assessee —Addition is deleted-Real estate business-Assessee on protective basis is not justified

Rainbow Vincom P. Ltd. v. ITO (2023)108 ITR 19 (SN)(Kol) (Trib)

S. 68 : Cash credits-Share Premium and share capital-Assessee Identity and creditworthiness of subscribers and genuineness of transaction is established-Assessing Officer not making independent enquiry or pointing out discrepancy or insufficiency in evidence furnished-Addition is not justified-Order of CIT(A) is not speaking order. [S.131]

Meridian Telesoft Ltd. v. Asst. CIT (2023)108 ITR 37 (SN)(Ahd) (Trib)

S. 68 : Cash credits-Share application money-Furnished names, addresses, Permanent Account Numbers of shareholders, confirmation letters, and copies of share certificate, money credited through banking channels-Addition is deleted.

ITO v. Umed Meghraj Jain (2023)108 ITR 58 (SN) (Ahd) (Trib)

S. 68 : Cash credits-Established identity, creditworthiness and genuineness of creditor —Addition is deleted.