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 directs deletion of addition under section 69A of Income-tax Act</h1> <h3>Tilak Raj Anand Versus Income Tax Officer, Ward 4 (4) Gurgaon</h3> The Tribunal allowed the appellant's appeal, directing the Assessing Officer to delete the addition of Rs. 4,00,000 made under section 69A of the ... Addition u/s. 69A - case of the assessee was selected for limited scrutiny under CASS to examine the issue of cash deposit during the year - whether the assessee was having the explained cash which was deposited in his bank account? - HELD THAT:- Authorities below have not commented anything adverse on the evidences filed by the assessee regarding availability of cash and correctness of the cash flow statement. No material is brought on record rebutting the contention of the assessee. Therefore, the finding of the authorities below is purely based upon surmises, which is not permissible under law. AO ought to have given a clear finding regarding availability of cash in the specified bank notes, which were banned by the order of the Government. It was stated before the authorities below that the demonetization of currency was declared by the Reserve Bank of India on 8.11.2016. After demonetization there was huge crowed to deposit old currency and withdrew new currency by public. As per the assessee it was not safe in view of the banks being over crowded during that period. This plea of the assessee was rejected stating that on earlier occasion the assessee had withdrawn bigger amount of money from the bank account. We find merit into the contention of the assessee that there were big lines and the banks were over crowded. Therefore, it was open to the assessee for the safety of the money to deposit in piece meals till the period as allowed by the Competent Authority. Therefore, the basis of making addition, in my view, is unjustified and deserves to be deleted. Assessing Officer is hereby directed to delete the addition. Grounds of appeal taken by the assessee are allowed. Issues:1. Validity of assessment order passed by Assessing Officer.2. Addition made under section 69A of the Income-tax Act, 1961.3. Justification of the addition by the Assessing Authority.Analysis:Issue 1: Validity of assessment orderThe appeal was against the order of the learned CIT(Appeals) pertaining to the assessment year 2017-18. The appellant raised grounds challenging the assessment order as being bad in law, against natural justice, and the provisions of the Income Tax Act. The only effective ground was related to the addition of Rs. 4,00,000 made under section 69A of the Act.Issue 2: Addition made under section 69AThe Assessing Officer made the addition of Rs. 4,00,000 under section 69A based on cash deposits during demonetization. The appellant contended that the cash was deposited in two lots due to security reasons. The Assessing Authority did not accept this explanation and made the addition. The CIT(Appeals) upheld the addition, leading to the appeal before the Tribunal.Issue 3: Justification of the additionThe appellant's counsel argued that the addition was made without proper verification and erred in not considering the cash flow statement provided. The Tribunal observed that the Assessing Officer did not establish the availability of cash with the appellant before demonetization. The Tribunal noted that if the appellant had cash before demonetization and chose to deposit it multiple times, it was permissible. The Tribunal found the addition unjustified as it was based on surmises and not supported by evidence. The Tribunal directed the Assessing Officer to delete the addition, concluding that the appellant's grounds of appeal were valid and allowed the appeal.In conclusion, the Tribunal allowed the appellant's appeal, directing the Assessing Officer to delete the addition of Rs. 4,00,000 made under section 69A of the Income-tax Act, 1961.

        Topics

        ActsIncome Tax
        No Records Found