Just a moment...

Top
Help
×

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.
Include Word: ?
Searches for this word in Main (Whole) Text
Exclude Word: ?
This word will not be present in Main (Whole) Text
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
  • 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
Situ: ?
State Name or City name of the Court
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
From Date: ?
Date of order
To Date:
TMI Citation:
Year
  • Year
  • 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
By Case ID:

When case Id is present, search is done only for this

Sort By:
RelevanceDefaultDate
    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 :

        📋
        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

        <h1>Tribunal rules in favor of assessee, deletes unjustified addition under Income-tax Act</h1> <h3>Shri Vilasrao Govind Patil Versus ITO, Ward-5, Satara</h3> The Tribunal ruled in favor of the assessee, deleting the addition of Rs. 3,00,000 made under section 69A of the Income-tax Act, 1961. The Tribunal found ... Addition u/s 69A - assessee offered a sum of ₹ 3,00,000 as ‘Miscellaneous Receipt’ in her revised computation of income - Authorities have made and confirmed the instant addition on the ground that this receipt of ₹ 3,00,000 was different from the deposit of ₹ 3,00,000 in the bank account - HELD THAT:- We are unable to appreciate the view point of the authorities below on the ground that once the assessee offered a sum of ₹ 3,00,000 on receipt of the amount, there could have been no occasion of making another similar addition on spending/investing the said amount. If a person earns ₹ 100 from undisclosed sources and thereafter offers it for taxation, its later utilization, and that too, through undisclosed transactions, would not invite any further addition. AO cannot make one addition at the time of earning the undisclosed income and another similar addition at the time of spending the same. Here is a case in which the assessee offered ₹ 3,00,000 as ‘Miscellaneous Receipt’, which has been duly taxed also. The utilization of such amount of ₹ 3,00,000 by the assessee by means of deposit in the bank account, cannot, in our opinion, call for any addition. We, therefore, order to delete the addition. - Decided in favour of assessee. Issues:Confirmation of addition under section 69A of the Income-tax Act, 1961.Analysis:The appeal arose from an order related to the assessment year 2010-11 where the only issue raised was against the confirmation of an addition of Rs. 3,00,000 made under section 69A of the Income-tax Act, 1961. The assessee had made certain deposits in their bank account, with details not provided initially. The Assessing Officer accepted all transactions except the Rs. 3,00,000 for which no documentary evidence was available. This addition was affirmed in the first appeal.During the proceedings, the assessee remained unrepresented, and the case was heard ex-parte. The assessee had offered the sum of Rs. 3,00,000 as 'Miscellaneous Receipt' in the revised computation of income. The authorities confirmed the addition on the basis that this receipt was different from the deposit in the bank account. However, the Tribunal found the authorities' viewpoint flawed as once the assessee offered the amount as income, there should be no further addition when utilizing the same amount. The Tribunal highlighted that if undisclosed income is offered for taxation, subsequent undisclosed transactions should not invite additional additions. In this case, the assessee had already offered and taxed the amount as 'Miscellaneous Receipt', hence the utilization of the same amount in the bank account should not lead to another addition. Consequently, the Tribunal ordered the deletion of the addition and allowed the appeal.In conclusion, the Tribunal found the addition of Rs. 3,00,000 under section 69A unjustified as the amount had already been offered and taxed as income. The Tribunal emphasized that making an addition at the time of earning undisclosed income and then again at the time of spending the same amount was unwarranted. Therefore, the Tribunal ruled in favor of the assessee, deleting the addition in question.

        Topics

        ActsIncome Tax
        No Records Found