TaxTMI Login
Just a moment...
Press 'Enter' to add multiple search terms. Rules for Better Search
of 
of 
No Folders have been created
Are you sure you want to delete "My most important" ?
NOTE:
of of 
All Highlights
of of All Highlights
Note
Bookmark
Share
Don't have an account? Register Here
of The ITAT dismissed the plea of violation of natural justice, holding that the assessee was given ample opportunity to explain discrepancies in books and bank statements but failed to provide cogent evidence. Although the AO did not formally reject the books under section 145(3), the assessment under section 144 was upheld as valid due to mismatches found and proper procedural compliance. Additions under section 69A for unexplained cash deposits were partly disallowed, as the tribunal found that taxing the same amount twice was unjustified; instead, profits were to be computed at 7.99% of total bank credits. Consequently, additions under sections 69A and 69C were deleted, and section 115BBE was held inapplicable. Regarding undisclosed credits from a purported property sale, the matter was remitted to the AO for fresh adjudication with directions to assess capital gains and verify evidence submitted by the assessee.
TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
