Opportunity to furnish unsecured-loan confirmations is required before reassessment initiation; proceedings require fresh consideration after taxpayer...
Under-reporting on a first reassessment return attracts penalty, while enhanced misreporting penalty requires proof of a statutory misreporting catego...
ITAT ruled in favor of the appellant, reversing the addition made under s. 68 for unexplained cash credits. The Tribunal found that since the Department had not disputed the genuineness of the assessee's business transactions or books of account, there was no justification for treating bank deposits as unexplained. The CIT(A)'s order was deemed cryptic, arbitrary and legally deficient for failing to provide a speaking order as required under ss. 250(4) and 250(6). The Tribunal noted the assessment order's self-contradictory nature in rejecting the return while determining income. The addition was directed to be deleted as no undisclosed sources of income had been established.
ITAT ruled in favor of the appellant, reversing the addition made under s. 68 for unexplained cash credits. The Tribunal found that since the Department had not disputed the genuineness of the assessee's business transactions or books of account, there was no justification for treating bank deposits as unexplained. The CIT(A)'s order was deemed cryptic, arbitrary and legally deficient for failing to provide a speaking order as required under ss. 250(4) and 250(6). The Tribunal noted the assessment order's self-contradictory nature in rejecting the return while determining income. The addition was directed to be deleted as no undisclosed sources of income had been established.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.
TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
of 4915 
