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>Tribunal Upheld in Deletion of Unexplained Cash Credit under Section 68: High Court Decision</h1> <h3>Commissioner of Income-Tax I Versus Himani M. Vakil</h3> Commissioner of Income-Tax I Versus Himani M. Vakil - TMI Issues:Challenge to deletion of addition of unexplained cash credit under section 68 by the Assessing Officer.Analysis:The appellant-revenue challenged the order of the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal (ITAT) regarding the deletion of the addition of Rs. 36,72,631 made under section 68 of the Income Tax Act, 1961. The respondent-assessee, an individual, had filed her income tax return for the assessment year 2006-07, showing total income including short and long term capital gains. The Assessing Officer treated a sum of Rs. 36,72,631 credited in the books of accounts as unexplained cash credit under section 68 and brought it to tax. However, the Commissioner (Appeals) allowed the claim of the assessee, directing the Assessing Officer to accept the capital gains. The Tribunal upheld this decision, leading to the revenue's appeal.The Tribunal found that the assessee had explained the purchase transactions were made on the 'Online Trading System' and were genuine. Transactions prior to April 1, 2005, were made using the broker's code, which was accepted as genuine by providing evidence such as contract notes, bank statements, and Demat Account details. The Tribunal concurred with the Commissioner (Appeals) that the assessee had provided complete and genuine details, not found false by the Assessing Officer. The Assessing Officer's suspicion led to treating the declared capital gain as unexplained cash credit under section 68. The Tribunal dismissed the revenue's appeal based on these factual findings.The High Court held that the Tribunal's decision was not unreasonable or perverse, as it was based on factual evidence and proper appreciation of records. The appellant's counsel failed to show any irrelevant material relied upon by the Tribunal or any ignored relevant material. The Court found no grounds to interfere with the concurrent findings of fact by the Tribunal. Consequently, the appeal was dismissed, upholding the deletion of the addition of unexplained cash credit under section 68 by the Assessing Officer.
TaxTMI 