This Digest of case laws is prepared by KSA Legal and AIFTP from judgements reported in BCAJ, CTR, DTR, ITD, ITR, ITR (Trib), Chamber's Journal, SOT, Taxman, TTJ, BCAJ, ACAJ, www.itatonline.org and other journals
Click here to download the pdf versions of the Digest of case laws
S.69A: Unexplained money-Merely on the basis of suspicion, howsoever it is strong, the Assessing Officer is not justified in presuming certain facts without having anything to corroborate. Accordingly, the deletion of impugned addition under section 69A made by CIT (Appeals) was upheld by the Tribunal.[S.133A]
Sunil Sahu v. ACIT (2023) 221 TTJ 631/ 222 DTR 186 (Indore) (Trib)
S. 69A : Unexplained money-AO cannot partly accept the books of accounts and partly reject the same and decide the sales as per his choice to categorize into bogus sales and non-bogus sales-AO cannot determine the bogus sales without disputing the books of accounts or bringing any evidence on record.[S.115BBE]
Balwinder Kumar v. ITO (2023) 102 ITR 228 (Amritsar) (Trib)
S. 69A: Unexplained money-When sufficient explanation for the source of the Cash deposits were provided to the lower authorities, it was incorrect to disregard the same, unless enquiries to prove contrary facts were made & established.
Joginder Singh Johal v. ITO (2023) 102 ITR 9 (SN) (Kol) (Trib)
S. 69A : Unexplained money-Delay condoned-Covid period-Demonetisation-Ad hoc addition is deleted. [S. 253]
Manju Baheti v. Assessing Officer (2023) 102 ITR 369(SMC) (Kol)(Trib)
S. 69A : Unexplained money-Cash gifts-Weddings, Raksha Bandhan, Birthdays and Deepawali-Failure to produce supporting documents-Addition is justified-Pending assessment-The time for summary assessment under section 143(1) and for notice under section 143(2) of the Act had not lapsed, it was a case of pending assessment, which got merged with assessment under section 153A. [S.153A]
Karina Kunjana Kapoor (Smt.) v. Dy. CIT (2023)102 ITR 82 (SN)(Delhi) (Trib)
S. 69: Unexplained investments-Difference in Cost of Construction as per valuation Report-Books of account not rejected-Addition is not justified. [S. 142A(2)]
ITO v. Pritham & Prathik Hospitals (P) Ltd (2023) 221 TTJ 911/223 DTR 177 (Hyd)(Trib)
S. 68: Cash credits-Bogus purchases-Addition is justified-Not responded to summons-All goods purchased are returned. [S.44AB, 133(6)
ITO v. Solid Machinery Co. (P) Ltd. (2023) 221 TTJ 1006 / 143 taxmann.com 293 (Mum) (Trib)
S.68 : Cash credits-Survey-Loose documents found in Survey-genuineness of share capital subscribers-Assessee must establish creditworthiness of subscribers. [S.133A]
ITO v. Pritham and Prathik Hospitals Pvt. Limited(2023) 221 TTJ 911/ 223 DTR 177 (Hyd)(Trib)
S.68: Cash credits-Demonetization-Sales-The treatment of cash deposit in the bank account during demonetization period as unexplained cash credit was not justifiable because the said amount was in the nature of cash sales duly recorded in audited books of accounts and such sales were made out of stock-in-trade and cash sales were duly supported by relevant bills. [S.115BBE, 143(3)]
ACIT v. Chandra Surana (2023) 221 TTJ 515/104 ITR 503 (Jaipur)(Trib)