Introducing the βIn Favour Ofβ filter in Case Laws.
- βοΈ Instantly identify judgments decided in favour of the Assessee, Revenue, or Appellant
- π Narrow down results with higher precision
Try it now in Case Laws β


Just a moment...
Introducing the βIn Favour Ofβ filter in Case Laws.
Try it now in Case Laws β


Press 'Enter' to add multiple search terms. Rules for Better Search
No Folders have been created
Are you sure you want to delete "My most important" ?
NOTE:
Don't have an account? Register Here
ITAT ruled against reopening of assessment under s.147 beyond four-year limitation period, finding no independent application of mind by AO or CIT(A). The tribunal rejected additions under s.68 regarding alleged accommodation entries, as the assessee provided sufficient evidence including ledger copies, invoices, and transport details for genuine business transactions. The revenue authorities' reliance on Investigation Unit's information without allowing cross-examination was deemed improper. The tribunal also dismissed allegations of unexplained commission payments for accommodation entries, noting the transactions were legitimate sales receipts from previous year, not undisclosed loans or share capital. Additions made purely on third-party information without corroborating evidence were set aside.