S. 69 :Unexplained investments-Cash deposit of 3 lakh-Returned income of assessee is more than Rs. 50 lakhs, cash deposit of around 3 lakhs could not be treated as unexplained investment.
Ravi Jakhar v. ACIT (2024) 208 ITD 633 (Mum) (Trib.)S. 69 :Unexplained investments-Cash deposit of 3 lakh-Returned income of assessee is more than Rs. 50 lakhs, cash deposit of around 3 lakhs could not be treated as unexplained investment.
Ravi Jakhar v. ACIT (2024) 208 ITD 633 (Mum) (Trib.)S. 69 :Unexplained investments-Bogus purchases-Accommodation entries-Disallowance is restricted at rate of 6 per cent of bogus purchases-Sale of shares-Explained the source of purchase-Order of CIT(A deleting the addition is affirmed-Reassessment is affirmed.[S. 147, 148]
DCIT v. Center Point Gems (P.) Ltd. (2024) 208 ITD 213 (Surat) (Trib.)S. 68 : Cash credits-Penny stock-Long term capital gains-Accommodation entries-DMAT-Sale of shares of PS Infrastructure and Services Limited-Addition is deleted-Exemption is allowed.[S. 10(38), 45]
Vikram N. Chandan. v. ITO (2024) 208 ITD 723 (Mum) (Trib.)S. 68 : Cash credits-Bogus donations-Cash deposited in banks-Addition is justified. [S. 35AC, 35AC(ii)]
Vaibhav Pankaj Shah v. ACIT (2024) 208 ITD 718 (Mum) (Trib.)S. 68 : Cash credits-Long term capital gains-Accommodation entries-Penny stock-Purchase of shares of LDPL and MARL in off-market transactions-Inordinate delay in dematerialization of those shares-Transaction is not genuine-Addition is justified. [S.10(38). 45]
Shailesh K. Patel HUF. v. ITO (2024) 208 ITD 539/ 231 TTJ 929/243 DTR 201 (Ahd) (Trib.)S. 68 : Cash credits-long-term capital gain-Sale of shares-Penny stock-Accommodation entries-Information from investigation Wing-Purchase in physical form-Decartelized-Purchase was made through Banking channels-Deletion of addition by CIT(A) is affirmed. [S. 10(38), 45]
ITO v. Prakashmal Malraj Jain. (2024) 208 ITD 403 (Mum) (Trib.)S. 68: Cash credits-Cash deposited in the Bank-Demonetization period-Merely because assessee had deposited said sourced income in form of SBNs during demonetization, same could not be considered as unexplained cash credits.
Shobha Tomar. v. DCIT (2024) 208 ITD 70 (Jaipur) (Trib.)S. 56 : Income from other sources-Valuation of shares-Valuation of shares of subsidiary company to determine FMV of holding company-DCF Method-Addition is deleted.[S.56(2)(viib), R.11UA(1)(c)(b)]
Leela Tourism and Heritage (P.) Ltd. v. ACIT (2024) 208 ITD 751 (Delhi) (Trib.)S. 56 : Income from other sources-Purchase of flat-Immovable property-Date of allotment-Value as on date of allotment had to be treated as stamp duty value for purpose of provision of section 56(2)(x)-At that time payment made was more than stamp duty value, no addition could be made.[S. 56(2)(x)]
ITO v. Narendra Kumar Jain. (2024) 208 ITD 583 (Mum) (Trib.)S. 56 : Income from other sources-Agricultural income-Increasing the expenditure on estimate basis-Addition is deleted.[S.10(1)]
A.S. Srinath (HUF) v. ITO (2024) 208 ITD 39/114 ITR 15 (SN) (Bang) (Trib.)