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>ITAT Remands Cases for Lack of Evidence</h1> <h3>YOGESH THAKKAR Versus DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX</h3> YOGESH THAKKAR Versus DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX - TMI Issues:- Addition of Rs. 60 Lakh on account of unexplained investment in shares for assessment year 2007-08.- Addition of Rs. 45 Lakh on account of unexplained investment in cash receipt, jewelry, and unaccounted income for assessment year 2008-09.Analysis:1. Issue 1 - Assessment Year 2007-08:- The assessee contested the addition of Rs. 60 Lakh for unexplained investment in shares of a company.- The Assessing Officer relied on a statement recorded under section 132(4) admitting to the unaccounted income.- The CIT (A) upheld the addition stating that the amount was not disclosed in the return.- The ITAT found that no shares were purchased, only an advance of Rs. 2.50 Lakh was given, and no corroborative evidence supported the investment.- The matter was remanded to the Assessing Officer for proper examination considering the surrender of Rs. 3 Crore by the company and lack of evidence for the investment.2. Issue 2 - Assessment Year 2008-09:- The addition of Rs. 45 Lakh for unexplained investments was challenged by the assessee.- The AO based the addition on a statement recorded under section 132(4) by the assessee.- The CIT (A) restricted the addition on cash receipt but sustained the additions on jewelry and unaccounted income.- The ITAT emphasized the need for corroborative evidence and remanded the issue back to the Assessing Officer for proper examination in light of the surrendered amount of Rs. 3 Crore by the company.3. Overall Decision:- The ITAT allowed both the assessee's and the department's appeals for statistical purposes.- The cases were remanded to the Assessing Officer for re-examination considering the lack of concrete evidence supporting the additions and the surrender of income by the company, emphasizing the need for corroborative evidence before making such additions.This detailed analysis highlights the key arguments, findings, and the ultimate decision of the Appellate Tribunal in the cited legal judgment.
TaxTMI 