TaxTMI Login
Just a moment...
Press 'Enter' to add multiple search terms. Rules for Better Search
When case Id is present, search is done only for this
of 
of 
No Folders have been created
Are you sure you want to delete "My most important" ?
NOTE:
of of 
All Case Laws
of of All Case Laws
Note
Bookmark
Share
Don't have an account? Register Here
of <h1>Legal Challenge Fails as Higher Authority Confirms Original Ruling, Validates Tribunal's Comprehensive Assessment of Case Merits</h1> <h3>Deputy Commissioner of Income-Tax Versus Rohini Builders</h3> GHC dismissed the appeal, finding no merit in the legal challenge. The court concurred with the Tribunal's original determination and concluded that no ... Unexplained cash credits - discrepancies in the explanations provided by the creditors regarding the sources of their deposits - as decided by ITAT [2000 (9) TMI 204 - ITAT AHMEDABAD-B] phraseology of s. 68 is clear. The legislature has laid down that in the absence of a satisfactory explanation, the unexplained cash credit 'may be charged to income-tax as the income of the assessee of that previous year'. In this case the legislative mandate is not in terms of the words 'shall be charged to income-tax as the income of the assessee of that previous year'. unsatisfactoriness of the explanation does not and need not automatically result in deeming the amount credited in the books as the income of the assessee as held in the case of CIT vs. Smt. P.K. Noorjehan [1997 (1) TMI 6 - SUPREME COURT] AO has not disallowed the interest claimed/paid in relation to these credits in the assessment year under consideration or even in the subsequent years, and TDS has been deducted out of the interest paid/credited to the creditors, we are of the opinion that the Departmental authorities were not justified in making the addition of which is directed to be deleted. Assessee appeal allowed. HELD THAT:- Considering the facts and circumstances of the case narrated by the Tribunal in para 7 of the judgement and the law explained in paras 8 and 8.1, we find no substance in the appeal. The appeal is therefore dismissed as no substantial question of law arises. The Gujarat High Court, through Justices B.C. Patel and D.A. Mehta, dismissed the appeal, finding 'no substance in the appeal' and holding that 'no substantial question of law arises,' as per the Tribunal's findings in paras 7, 8, and 8.1 of its judgment.
TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
