Condonation of refiling delay refused where repeated defects, lack of diligence and vague explanations defeated the appeal against resolution plan app...
Page of 4828
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
4401 to 4420 of 96556 Results
❮
❯
❯❯
0 / 200
Expand Note
Add to Folder
No Folders have been created
+
Are you sure you want to delete "My most important" ?
ITAT ruled that additions under section 68 were invalid as the assessee had not maintained books of accounts, making the provision inapplicable. The Tribunal noted that since no amount was found credited in any books of account, the AO's addition under section 68 was unsustainable. Additionally, the CIT(A) erroneously applied section 69A instead of section 68 in their appellate order, rendering the decision legally flawed. The assessee had actually incurred losses rather than gains. The Tribunal's decision emphasized that section 68 specifically requires the existence of books of accounts and credited entries therein. Appeal decided in favor of the assessee.
ITAT ruled that additions under section 68 were invalid as the assessee had not maintained books of accounts, making the provision inapplicable. The Tribunal noted that since no amount was found credited in any books of account, the AO's addition under section 68 was unsustainable. Additionally, the CIT(A) erroneously applied section 69A instead of section 68 in their appellate order, rendering the decision legally flawed. The assessee had actually incurred losses rather than gains. The Tribunal's decision emphasized that section 68 specifically requires the existence of books of accounts and credited entries therein. Appeal decided in favor of the assessee.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.