Just a moment...
Press 'Enter' to add multiple search terms. Rules for Better Search
Use comma for multiple locations.
---------------- For section wise search only -----------------
Accuracy Level ~ 90%
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
No Folders have been created
Are you sure you want to delete "My most important" ?
NOTE:
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
Don't have an account? Register Here
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
Issues: Whether the addition made as unexplained cash credit under section 68 of the Income-tax Act, 1961 was sustainable when the assessee furnished the names, addresses, contact details and supporting records of the customers and the Assessing Officer made no independent verification.
Analysis: The assessee produced customer-wise particulars, sample invoices, bank records, cash book and other supporting documents showing receipt of advances from 611 customers. The Assessing Officer rejected the claim mainly on the ground that such collections on a single day during the demonetisation period appeared improbable, but did not carry out basic verification, including issuing notices under section 133(6) of the Income-tax Act, 1961 or making sample inquiries from the customers or other relevant authorities. On these facts, the assessee was held to have discharged the initial onus placed upon it, and the addition could not be sustained without proper enquiry by the Revenue.
Conclusion: The addition under section 68 of the Income-tax Act, 1961 was deleted and the issue was decided in favour of the assessee.
Ratio Decidendi: Where the assessee furnishes complete particulars and supporting material establishing the identity and source of cash receipts, an addition under section 68 of the Income-tax Act, 1961 cannot be sustained in the absence of meaningful verification by the Assessing Officer.