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 ITAT held that the Assessing Officer (AO) exceeded jurisdiction by making an addition u/s 68 for unexplained unsecured loans by treating security deposits from sub/petty contractors as unsecured loans. The case was selected for limited scrutiny, and the AO was required to obtain permission from the PCIT before investigating matters outside the selected parameters. The security deposits were against executed projects, evidenced by TDS deductions on payments to sub-contractors. The unsecured loans in the balance sheet pertained to different parties already examined by the AO. Therefore, the ITAT decided in favor of the assessee and held the addition unsustainable.
TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
