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-Cash deposit during demonetization-Cash from sundry creditors-Not in violation of receiving specified bank notes-Failure by assessee to explain source-Matter Remanded.
Jagjit Singh v. ITO (2023)101 ITR 298 (Amritsar) (Trib)
S. 69A : Unexplained money-Cash available in old demonetised currency-Withdrawal from bank upto November 8, 2016-Disallowance to that extent not sustainable-Balance disallowance of balance cash proper.
Shail Jayesh Shah v. ITO (2023)101 ITR 38 (SN) (Mum) (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S. 69A : Unexplained money-Compensation on land acquisition-Received on husband’s bank account-withdrawn from and deposited in assessee’s bank account-No material to prove that money utilised for other purpose-Additions to be deleted.
Santosh v. ITO (2023)101 ITR 32 (SN)(Delhi) (Trib)
S. 69 : Un explained investments-Search and seizure-Undisclosed income-Seized documents showing receipts and payments-Assessee in real estate business-Cannot be identified whether money used for purchase of land or loan-Profit at 10% to meet end of justice-Seized documents showing receipts and payments-Additions cannot be made on receipts and payments both-Agricultural Income-No evidence of agricultural activity-Receipt cannot be treated as sale of agricultural property-Cash receipts-Declared in original return-Cannot be taxed again in absence of contrary materials. [S. 132]
Pujala Mahesh Babu v. Asst. CIT (2023)101 ITR 458 (Hyd) (Trib)
S. 69 : Unexplained investments-Profits from sale of land-Contention that assessee only acted as aggregator and seller offered income as tax-AO to examine contention of the assessee-Matter remanded
Pawan Green Channels Pvt. Ltd v. Dy. CIT (2023)101 ITR 19 (SN) (Chennai) (Trib)
S. 69 : Unexplained investments-Loan received in USD and deposited in Indian bank account-Investment on same day in mutual funds-Source of funds outside India not taxable in India-CIT(A)’s direction to obtain certified true copies of source of income-Justified.
Asst. CIT (IT) v. Vijaykumar Vasantbhai Patel (2023)101 ITR 1 (SN) (Ahd) (Trib)
S. 69 : Unexplained investments-Unexplained expenditure-Additions on the basis of seized documents-Cannot explain source-Amount not pertaining to assessment year-Addition not sustainable-Share of assessee at 30% as per seized documents-Addition to that extent only.
Pujala Mahesh Babu v.Asst. CIT (2023)101 ITR 458 (Hyd) (Trib)
S. 69 : Unexplained investments-Investment in land-Unable to explain source of investment-Merely stating sufficient funds does not discharge onus-No Cash flow statement to show fund availability-Assessee not maintaining book of accounts.
Pujala Mahesh Babu v. Asst. CIT (2023)101 ITR 458 (Hyd) (Trib)
S. 69 : Unexplained investments-Appeal to CIT(A)-Additional evidence-Admission-No proof of source of funds for purchase of mutual funds-Deletion of addition by CIT(A) on the basis of additional evidence-No recording of reasons-No opportunity to A.O. to verify submission-Matter remanded. [R. 46A]
ITO (IT) v. Shehnaz Nurdin Ajania (Smt.) (2023)101 ITR 618 (Surat) (Trib)
S. 69 : Unexplained investments-Survey-Discrepancies in stocks-Disclosed during survey duly incorporated in books of accounts of assessee-AO accepted and allowed credit-Addition is deleted.[S.133A]
Umananda Rice Mill Ltd. v.Asst. CIT (2023)101 ITR 140 (Kol) (Trib)