Introducing the “In Favour Of” filter in Case Laws.
- ⚖️ Instantly identify judgments decided in favour of the Assessee, Revenue, or Appellant
- 🔍 Narrow down results with higher precision
Try it now in Case Laws →
TaxTMI Login
🚀 New Feature Launched ✕
Just a moment...
Introducing the “In Favour Of” filter in Case Laws.
Try it now in Case Laws →
Press 'Enter' to add multiple search terms. Rules for Better Search
of 
of 
No Folders have been created
Are you sure you want to delete "My most important" ?
NOTE:
of of 
All Highlights
of of All Highlights
Note
Bookmark
Share
Don't have an account? Register Here
of The Appellate Tribunal rendered the following decision: The assessee, engaged in textile and grey business with a turnover exceeding Rs. 1 crore, made cash deposits during the demonetization period. Considering the business nature and inability to substantiate the entire source, 20% of the total cash deposit was treated as unexplained income, taxable at normal rates, while the remaining 80% was deleted. Regarding sundry creditors addition, the Tribunal directed deletion due to lack of verification by lower authorities despite the assessee providing account confirmations and sample purchase bills. The 10% ad hoc disallowance of expenses was upheld as the assessee did not offer income u/s 44AD, and the disallowance ratio was reasonable considering the nature of expenses.
TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
