Political contribution deductions require genuine transactions; banking records and party registration alone cannot defeat evidence of accommodation e...
Post-death GST liability permits fresh proceedings against legal representatives, while discontinued-business recovery remains limited to the inherite...
Non-confirmation of FEMA seizure prevents adjudicators from overriding pending appellate findings on recorded reasons and suspected foreign asset hold...
Assessee declared cash deposit of Rs. 42 lacs during demonetization period as income. AO made another addition u/s 69A for same amount, treating it as unexplained money and levied tax u/s 115BBE, resulting in double taxation of same income. ITAT held that AO's action of making addition over and above income declared by assessee is wrong and against provisions of Act. Since assessee had already offered cash deposit as income, no separate addition could be made. Appeal allowed.
Assessee declared cash deposit of Rs. 42 lacs during demonetization period as income. AO made another addition u/s 69A for same amount, treating it as unexplained money and levied tax u/s 115BBE, resulting in double taxation of same income. ITAT held that AO's action of making addition over and above income declared by assessee is wrong and against provisions of Act. Since assessee had already offered cash deposit as income, no separate addition could be made. Appeal allowed.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.
TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
