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 grants partial relief in tax appeals, cancels penalty, emphasizes burden of proof</h1> <h3>Rich Paints Ltd. Versus DCIT, Co. Cir. 1 (2) Baroda.</h3> The Tribunal partly allowed the quantum appeals for A.Y. 1995-96, 1996-97, and 1997-98 for statistical purposes. The penalty appeal for A.Y. 1997-98 was ... - Issues Involved:The judgment involves appeals filed by the assessee against appellate orders of the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals)-III, Baroda for multiple assessment years. The main issue revolves around cash deposits made by the assessee, promoter's contribution, and subsequent additions and disallowances by the Assessing Officer.ITA No.2118/Ahd/2000 and 851/Ahd/2009 (A.Y.1997-98):The Assessing Officer noted cash deposits in the bank account of the assessee, which the assessee claimed were book entries to meet SEBI requirements. The assessee contended that the bank accounts were manipulated with the bank manager's involvement. The Tribunal directed the assessee to provide details and evidence regarding the cash credits received from various persons for share application money. The burden was placed on the assessee to prove the source of cash deposits, and the matter was remanded back to the AO for fresh decision.Penalty Appeal for A.Y.1997-98:The penalty imposed by the AO under Section 68 of the Act was canceled since the addition was remanded back to the AO for fresh consideration. The Tribunal held that the penalty appeal did not survive in light of the remand order.Quantum Appeals for A.Y.1995-96 and 1996-97:Similar to the A.Y.1997-98 issue, the Tribunal set aside the orders of the CIT(A) for these years as well, directing the matter to be reconsidered by the AO. The Tribunal allowed the quantum appeals for A.Y.1995-96 and 1996-97 for statistical purposes.Overall Decision:The Tribunal partly allowed the quantum appeals for A.Y.1995-96, 1996-97, and 1997-98 for statistical purposes. The penalty appeal for A.Y.1997-98 was allowed, and the penalty was canceled due to the remand of the addition back to the AO. The Tribunal emphasized the assessee's burden to provide evidence supporting the source of cash deposits and directed fresh consideration by the AO for all relevant issues.
TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
