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 upholds deletion of undisclosed income additions, citing satisfactory explanation for sources.</h1> <h3>INCOME TAX OFFICER. Versus SURJYA KUMAR BANIK & BROS.</h3> INCOME TAX OFFICER. Versus SURJYA KUMAR BANIK & BROS. - TTJ 033, 601, Issues:Appeal against deletion of additions made as income from undisclosed sources.Analysis:The Revenue contended that the CIT(A) erred in deleting the addition of Rs. 24,000 and Rs. 27,000 as income from undisclosed sources. The Income Tax Officer (ITO) had made these additions based on cash credits in the names of the wives of the partners of the assessee firm. The ITO conducted inquiries and found discrepancies in the accounts maintained by the ladies regarding their milk and fishery businesses. He concluded that the income represented secret profits of the assessee for the relevant years.The assessee challenged the ITO's decision before the CIT(A), arguing that the deposits were genuine and supported by evidence. The CIT(A) agreed with the assessee, noting that there were cows in the household of the ladies and certain findings by the ITO supported the source of income, albeit with insufficient supporting materials. The CIT(A) concluded that the assessee had satisfactorily explained the source of the credits for both years and deleted the additions.Upon review, the Appellate Tribunal found that the CIT(A) had properly considered the ITO's findings and reached a reasonable conclusion based on the facts. The Tribunal upheld the CIT(A)'s order, stating that no interference was warranted since the CIT(A)'s decision was valid. Consequently, the appeals by the Revenue were dismissed.
TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
