Category: Income-Tax Act

Archive for the ‘Income-Tax Act’ Category


Gulu Hassanand Raney v. ADIT (IT)(2023) 201 ITD 63/ 225 TTJ 725 (Mum)(Trib)

S. 80 : Return for losses-Non-resident Indian-Tax audit-Audit as per Reserve Bank of India permission-Due date for filing of return was 30-9-2016-Return was filed on 17-10 2016-Loss not allowed to be carry forward. [S.44AB, 72,139(1),Explanation 2(a)(ii), 139(3)]

Sawailal Surtaram Bhatti v .ITO (2023)103 ITR 262 (Mum) (Trib)

S. 69C : Unexplained expenditure-Bogus purchases-Accommodation entries-information by investigation wing-assessee failed to prove whole purchases as genuine-5 % profit element to be added in purchases. [S. 147,148]

Sukumar Solvent (P.) Ltd. v. ACIT (2023) 200 ITD 614 (Kol (Trib.)

S. 69C : Unexplained expenditure-Excess stock-Survey-Addition is restricted only to profit element of stock.[S.133A]

Hari Chand v. ITO (2023) 155 taxmann.com 492/ 105 ITR 610 (Amritsar)(Trib)

S. 69A : Unexplained money-Difference between sale consideration shown in registered deed and that deposited in bank account-Appeal arising out of lack of verification-Matter remitted to Assessing Officer for adjudication de novo.

Hira Lal Kadlabju v. Asst. CIT (2023)104 ITR 608/ 202 ITD 133 (Amritsar)(Trib) Anish Bhan v. ITO (2023)104 ITR 608 (Amritsar)(Trib)

S. 69A : Unexplained money-Ownership of cash found in premises-Protective and substantive assessment pending for determination-Matter remitted to Assessing Officer.[S. 132]

Eagle Fleet Services vs. Asst. CIT (2023) 105 ITR 78(SN) (Chennai) (Trib)

S. 69A : Unexplained money-Demonetisation-Cash deposits of specified bank notes during demonetisation period-AO accepting explanation of assessee that receipts from business-however, treating the deposits as unexplained solely on the ground that notes ceased to be legal tender-Unjustified.[S. 132]

Santosh v.ITO (2023)101 ITR 32 (SN.)(Delhi) (Trib)

S. 69A : Unexplained money-Compensation on land acquisition-Received on husband’s bank account-Withdrawn from and deposited in assessee’s bank account-No material to prove that money utilised for other purpose-Addition is deleted.[S. 68]

Tara Kabra v. DCIT, CC-1(3) (Mum)(Trib)

S. 69 : Unexplained investments-Search-Source of the Jewellery found during the Search/Seizure Operation-Benefit of instruction No.1916 dated 11.05.1994 issued by CBDT.[S. 132]

Anoop Gopikishan Jaju v. Asst. CIT (2023) 105 ITR 22 (SN) (Pune) (Trib)

S. 69 : Unexplained investments-Cash paid to the developer for purchase of land-during the course of survey action developer accepted the receipt of on money and details of the same was provided-in the absence of providing the source, the AO is justified in treating the payment as income from undisclosed sources.

Abbasali Chinikamwalla v. ITO, (Mum)(Trib.) (UR)

S. 69 : Unexplained investments-Demonetisation-Cash withdrawal-Only source of income is pension-Addition is deleted. [S. 68]