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...
ITAT ruled in favor of the taxpayer regarding disputed cash deposits during demonetization. The assessee had properly recorded cash sales in accounting books and provided requisite documentation supporting the transactions. While AO had partially accepted sales records, certain deposits made on 13.11.2016 were questioned solely due to timing during demonetization. Given that complete sales documentation was maintained and verified through standard procedures, ITAT found no justification for treating these recorded sales as unexplained cash deposits under s.68. The addition made by AO was accordingly deleted, as differential treatment of same category of transactions based merely on deposit timing was deemed inappropriate.
ITAT ruled in favor of the taxpayer regarding disputed cash deposits during demonetization. The assessee had properly recorded cash sales in accounting books and provided requisite documentation supporting the transactions. While AO had partially accepted sales records, certain deposits made on 13.11.2016 were questioned solely due to timing during demonetization. Given that complete sales documentation was maintained and verified through standard procedures, ITAT found no justification for treating these recorded sales as unexplained cash deposits under s.68. The addition made by AO was accordingly deleted, as differential treatment of same category of transactions based merely on deposit timing was deemed inappropriate.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.
TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
