https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=68481 The Tribunal ruled in favor of the assessee, deleting the addition related to undervaluation of closing stock for the assessment year 1989-90. It found that the valuation discrepancy was due to business practices for securing bank finance, not actual undervaluation. Additionally, the Tribunal directed further investigation into the alleged unexplained cash credit of Rs. 15,000, noting the genuineness of the transaction based on repayment and supporting documents. The AO's failure to properly verify and examine the depositor led the Tribunal to accept this ground of appeal for statistical purposes. en-us Wed, 17 Sep 2003 00:00:00 +0530 Mon, 18 Jun 2012 14:07:00 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=68481 The Tribunal ruled in favor of the assessee, deleting the addition related to undervaluation of closing stock for the assessment year 1989-90. It found that the valuation discrepancy was due to business practices for securing bank finance, not actual undervaluation. Additionally, the Tribunal directed further investigation into the alleged unexplained cash credit of Rs. 15,000, noting the genuineness of the transaction based on repayment and supporting documents. The AO's failure to properly verify and examine the depositor led the Tribunal to accept this ground of appeal for statistical purposes. Case-Laws Income Tax Wed, 17 Sep 2003 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=68481