Political contribution deductions require recipient party compliance with contribution-reporting conditions; banking-channel donations alone do not qu...
Aggregation under TNMM prevents selective testing of intra-group services without comparable uncontrolled transactions, while appellate additional cla...
Protective assessment cannot duplicate identical receipts under competing characterisations; remote services did not establish a taxable permanent est...
Current account treatment of overseas tournament services removed most FEMA findings, but excess EEFC remittance and delayed repatriation remained bre...
Modification of bail conditions remains available through inherent jurisdiction where onerous deposits undermine justice and cannot recover disputed d...
Merchant banker regulation consolidates registration, governance, capital, reporting, outsourcing and investor-protection requirements under an update...
The Appellate Tribunal considered unexplained cash deposits...
ITAT addressed cash deposits during demonetization. Found lack of evidence for certain expenses. Ruled Section 115BBE for higher rate of tax not retroactive.
Contents
Summary
Note
Bookmark
Share
✓ Copied successfully !
Print
Print Options
For full text, please login
Login to TaxTMI
Verification Pending
The Email Id has not been verified. Click on the link we have sent on
The Appellate Tribunal considered unexplained cash deposits during demonetization. The Tribunal noted the assessee's agricultural income and expenses but found insufficient evidence of various expenses. Adjusting claimed expenses, a portion of the unexplained cash remained unexplained. The Tribunal partly allowed the assessee's appeal. The Tribunal ruled that Section 115BBE couldn't be applied retroactively as it came into force after the search. Citing precedent, the Tribunal held the addition u/s 115BBE was unsustainable. Therefore, Section 115BBE was deemed inapplicable in the case, favoring the assessee.
The Appellate Tribunal considered unexplained cash deposits during demonetization. The Tribunal noted the assessee's agricultural income and expenses but found insufficient evidence of various expenses. Adjusting claimed expenses, a portion of the unexplained cash remained unexplained. The Tribunal partly allowed the assessee's appeal. The Tribunal ruled that Section 115BBE couldn't be applied retroactively as it came into force after the search. Citing precedent, the Tribunal held the addition u/s 115BBE was unsustainable. Therefore, Section 115BBE was deemed inapplicable in the case, favoring the assessee.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.