Just a moment...

Top
Help
AI OCR

Convert scanned orders, printed notices, PDFs and images into clean, searchable, editable text within seconds. Starting at 2 Credits/page

Try Now
×

By creating an account you can:

Logo TaxTMI
>
Call Us / Help / Feedback

Contact Us At :

E-mail: [email protected]

Call / WhatsApp at: +91 99117 96707

For more information, Check Contact Us

FAQs :

To know Frequently Asked Questions, Check FAQs

Most Asked Video Tutorials :

For more tutorials, Check Video Tutorials

Submit Feedback/Suggestion :

Email :
Please provide your email address so we can follow up on your feedback.
Category :
Description :
Min 15 characters0/2000
Make Most of Text Search
  1. Checkout this video tutorial: How to search effectively on TaxTMI.
  2. Put words in double quotes for exact word search, eg: "income tax"
  3. Avoid noise words such as : 'and, of, the, a'
  4. Sort by Relevance to get the most relevant document.
  5. Press Enter to add multiple terms/multiple phrases, and then click on Search to Search.
  6. Text Search
  7. The system will try to fetch results that contains ALL your words.
  8. Once you add keywords, you'll see a new 'Search In' filter that makes your results even more precise.
  9. Text Search
Add to...
You have not created any category. Kindly create one to bookmark this item!
Create New Category
Hide
Title :
Description :
❮❮ Hide
Default View
Expand ❯❯
Close ✕
🔎 Case Laws - Adv. Search
TEXT SEARCH:

Press 'Enter' to add multiple search terms. Rules for Better Search

Search In:
Main Text + AI Text
  • Main Text
  • Main Text + AI Text
  • AI Text
  • Title Only
  • Head Notes
  • Citation
Party Name: ?
Party name / Appeal No.
Law:
---- All Laws----
  • ---- All Laws----
  • GST
  • Income Tax
  • Benami Property
  • Customs
  • Corporate Laws
  • Securities / SEBI
  • Insolvency & Bankruptcy
  • FEMA
  • Law of Competition
  • PMLA
  • Service Tax
  • Central Excise
  • CST, VAT & Sales Tax
  • Wealth tax
  • Indian Laws
Courts: ?
Select Court or Tribunal
---- All Courts ----
  • ---- All Courts ----
  • Supreme Court - All
  • Supreme Court
  • SC Orders / Highlights
  • High Court
  • Appellate Tribunal
  • Tribunal / NCLT & Others
  • Appellate authority for Advance Ruling
  • Advance Ruling Authority
  • National Financial Reporting Authority
  • Competition Commission of India
  • ANTI-PROFITEERING AUTHORITY
  • Commission
  • Central Government
  • Board
  • DISTRICT/ SESSIONS Court
  • Commissioner / Appellate Authority
  • Other
In Favour Of: New
---- In Favour Of ----
  • ---- In Favour Of ----
  • Assessee
  • In favour of Assessee
  • Partly in favour of Assessee
  • Revenue
  • In favour of Revenue
  • Partly in favour of Revenue
  • Appellant / Petitioner
  • In favour of Appellant
  • In favour of Petitioner
  • In favour of Respondent
  • Partly in favour of Appellant
  • Partly in favour of Petitioner
  • Others
  • Neutral (alternate remedy)
  • Neutral (Others)
Landmark: ?
Where case is referred in other cases
---- All Cases ----
  • ---- All Cases ----
  • Referred in >= 3 Cases
  • Referred in >= 4 Cases
  • Referred in >= 5 Cases
  • Referred in >= 10 Cases
  • Referred in >= 15 Cases
  • Referred in >= 25 Cases
  • Referred in >= 50 Cases
  • Referred in >= 100 Cases
Situ: ?
State Name or City name of the Court.
Eg: Madhya Pradesh, Orissa, Hyderabad

Use comma for multiple locations.

AY/FY: New?
Enter only the year or year range (e.g., 2025, 2025–26, or 2025–2026).
Include Word: ?
Searches for this word in Main (Whole) Text
Exclude Word: ?
This word will not be present in Main (Whole) Text
From Date: ?
Date of order
To Date:

---------------- For section wise search only -----------------


Statute Type: ?
This filter alone wont work. 1st select a law > statute > section from below filter
New
---- All Statutes----
  • ---- All Statutes ----
  • Select the law first, to see the statutes list
Sections: ?
Select a statute to see the list of sections here
New
---- All Sections ----
  • ---- All Sections ----
  • Select the statute first, to see the sections list

Accuracy Level ~ 90%



TMI Citation:
Year
  • Year
  • 2026
  • 2025
  • 2024
  • 2023
  • 2022
  • 2021
  • 2020
  • 2019
  • 2018
  • 2017
  • 2016
  • 2015
  • 2014
  • 2013
  • 2012
  • 2011
  • 2010
  • 2009
  • 2008
  • 2007
  • 2006
  • 2005
  • 2004
  • 2003
  • 2002
  • 2001
  • 2000
  • 1999
  • 1998
  • 1997
  • 1996
  • 1995
  • 1994
  • 1993
  • 1992
  • 1991
  • 1990
  • 1989
  • 1988
  • 1987
  • 1986
  • 1985
  • 1984
  • 1983
  • 1982
  • 1981
  • 1980
  • 1979
  • 1978
  • 1977
  • 1976
  • 1975
  • 1974
  • 1973
  • 1972
  • 1971
  • 1970
  • 1969
  • 1968
  • 1967
  • 1966
  • 1965
  • 1964
  • 1963
  • 1962
  • 1961
  • 1960
  • 1959
  • 1958
  • 1957
  • 1956
  • 1955
  • 1954
  • 1953
  • 1952
  • 1951
  • 1950
  • 1949
  • 1948
  • 1947
  • 1946
  • 1945
  • 1944
  • 1943
  • 1942
  • 1941
  • 1940
  • 1939
  • 1938
  • 1937
  • 1936
  • 1935
  • 1934
  • 1933
  • 1932
  • 1931
  • 1930
Volume
  • Volume
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
  • 6
  • 7
  • 8
  • 9
  • 10
  • 11
  • 12
TMI
Example : 2024 (6) TMI 204
Sort By: ?
In Sort By 'Default', exact matches for text search are shown at the top, followed by the remaining results in their regular order.
RelevanceDefaultDate
TMI Citation
    No Records Found
    ❯❯
    MaximizeMaximizeMaximize
    0 / 200
    Expand Note
    Add to Folder

    No Folders have been created

      +

      Are you sure you want to delete "My most important" ?

      NOTE:

      Case Laws
      Showing Results for :
      Reset Filters
      Results Found:
      AI TextQuick Glance by AIHeadnote
      Show All SummariesHide All Summaries
      No Records Found

      Case Laws

      Back

      All Case Laws

      Showing Results for :
      Reset Filters
      Showing
      Records
      ExpandCollapse
        No Records Found

        Case Laws

        Back

        All Case Laws

        Showing Results for : Reset Filters
        Case ID :

        2019 (10) TMI 728 - AT - Income Tax

        📋
        Contents
        Note

        Note

        -

        Bookmark

        print

        Print

        Login to TaxTMI
        Verification Pending

        The Email Id has not been verified. Click on the link we have sent on

        Didn't receive the mail? Resend Mail

        Don't have an account? Register Here

        Tribunal allows partial appeal, sets off additions against claimed losses under Sections 69 & 68 The Tribunal partially allowed the appeal, directing the additions under Sections 69 and 68 to be set off against the assessee's claimed losses, following ...
                      Cases where this provision is explicitly mentioned in the judgment/order text; may not be exhaustive. To view the complete list of cases mentioning this section, Click here.

                          Tribunal allows partial appeal, sets off additions against claimed losses under Sections 69 & 68

                          The Tribunal partially allowed the appeal, directing the additions under Sections 69 and 68 to be set off against the assessee's claimed losses, following CBDT Circular No. 11/2019. Emphasizing the lack of evidence linking seized documents to the assessee, it upheld the principle of setting off losses against such additions for assessment years before 2017-18.




                          Issues Involved:
                          1. Addition of Rs. 26,68,500/- under Section 69 of the Income Tax Act, 1961.
                          2. Addition of Rs. 85,000/- under Section 69.
                          3. Non-availability of depreciation set-off against additions confirmed under Section 69.
                          4. Validity of additions considering the business commencement date.

                          Issue-wise Detailed Analysis:

                          1. Addition of Rs. 26,68,500/- under Section 69 of the Income Tax Act, 1961:
                          The assessee contested the addition of Rs. 26,68,500/- made under Section 69 based on seized documents found from an employee's residence. The assessee argued that these documents were related to the employee’s independent construction business and not the assessee-company. The Assessing Officer did not accept this explanation due to a lack of documentary evidence. The CIT (A) confirmed the addition under Section 69, stating that the payments were towards capital-work-in-progress. However, the Tribunal noted that the documents were not found on the assessee’s premises, and the presumption under Section 132(4A) read with Section 292C could not be drawn against the assessee. As such, there was no concrete evidence linking the seized documents to the assessee-company.

                          2. Addition of Rs. 85,000/- under Section 69:
                          The addition of Rs. 85,000/- was made based on cash found during a search operation. The assessee failed to provide a satisfactory explanation for the cash found. The CIT (A) confirmed this addition under Section 68 due to the absence of any explanation from the assessee. The Tribunal upheld this addition, noting the lack of evidence or explanation from the assessee regarding the source of the cash.

                          3. Non-availability of depreciation set-off against additions confirmed under Section 69:
                          The assessee argued that the losses, including depreciation, should be set off against the additions made under Section 69. The CIT (A) directed the Assessing Officer to calculate the depreciation allowance as per Section 32(1) read with Explanation 5 of the Act but held that the loss would not be available for set-off against the addition confirmed under Section 69. The Tribunal referred to CBDT Circular No. 11/2019, which clarified that for assessments prior to the Assessment Year 2017-18, losses could be set off against additions made under Sections 68/69. Consequently, the Tribunal directed that the addition of Rs. 26,68,500/- under Section 69 and Rs. 85,000/- under Section 68 be set off against the claimed losses totaling Rs. 39,05,893/-.

                          4. Validity of additions considering the business commencement date:
                          The assessee contended that the additions were unjust as the company was under erection and had not commenced business before 01.03.2011. The Tribunal did not delve deeply into this argument, as the primary focus was on the evidence linking the seized documents to the assessee and the set-off of losses against the additions.

                          Conclusion:
                          The Tribunal partly allowed the appeal, directing that the additions made under Sections 69 and 68 be set off against the assessee’s claimed losses, in accordance with the CBDT Circular No. 11/2019. The Tribunal emphasized the lack of evidence linking the seized documents to the assessee-company and upheld the principle that losses could be set off against such additions for assessment years prior to 2017-18.
                          Full Summary is available for active users!
                          Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.

                          Topics

                          ActsIncome Tax
                          No Records Found