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 Decision: Assessments Partly Allowed with Adjustments based on Evidence</h1> <h3>G. Ashok Reddy, HYDERABAD Versus Income Tax Officer, Ward-4 (1), HYDERABAD</h3> G. Ashok Reddy, HYDERABAD Versus Income Tax Officer, Ward-4 (1), HYDERABAD - [2020] 80 ITR (Trib) 550 (ITAT [Hyd]) Issues:Assessment of dividend income, commission received, bank deposits, foreign tour expenses.Assessment of Dividend Income:The Assessing Officer (AO) made an addition of Rs. 9,000 to the assessee's income, considering surplus dividend received from Osmania Chit Fund. The CIT(A) confirmed this addition, as the assessee failed to provide evidence supporting the actual amount received. The Tribunal upheld this decision, as no further evidence was presented by the assessee.Assessment of Commission Received:The AO added Rs. 1,75,052 to the assessee's income based on a discrepancy in the total receipts declared by the assessee. The CIT(A) corrected the mistake and restricted the addition to Rs. 1,54,172 after considering Form 26AS. The Tribunal found no reason to interfere with the CIT(A)'s order, dismissing the assessee's appeal on this issue.Assessment of Bank Deposits:The AO added Rs. 10 lakhs to the assessee's income under section 68 of the Act, related to deposits made into the bank account. The assessee claimed this amount was received from a family settlement, supported by Gift Deeds and a confirmation letter. The Tribunal accepted the source of deposit as legitimate, deleting the addition of Rs. 10 lakhs based on the preponderance of probabilities and circumstantial evidence.Assessment of Foreign Tour Expenses:The AO disallowed Rs. 1,52,596 claimed as foreign tour expenses by the assessee, as no evidence was provided to establish the business purpose of the travel. The CIT(A)'s decision was upheld by the Tribunal, rejecting the appeal on this issue due to lack of substantiating evidence.The Tribunal partly allowed the assessee's appeal, upholding some additions while deleting others based on the evidence and explanations provided. The order was pronounced on 5th March 2020.
TaxTMI 