https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=214628 The Revenue's late-filed appeals against the CIT(A)'s orders for assessment years 1994-95 and 1995-96 were admitted after condonation. Disputes arose over the deletion of additions under section 69A and treatment of peak credits as unexplained cash credits. The Hon'ble ITAT, Ahmedabad directed a fresh assessment focusing on peak deposits. The CIT(A)'s non-speaking order lacking essential details led to remand for a comprehensive decision. Ultimately, both appeals were allowed for statistical purposes, stressing the importance of detailed information for accurate assessment of peak credits in the assessee's bank account. en-us Tue, 29 May 2012 00:00:00 +0530 Tue, 03 Jul 2012 18:47:00 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=214628 The Revenue's late-filed appeals against the CIT(A)'s orders for assessment years 1994-95 and 1995-96 were admitted after condonation. Disputes arose over the deletion of additions under section 69A and treatment of peak credits as unexplained cash credits. The Hon'ble ITAT, Ahmedabad directed a fresh assessment focusing on peak deposits. The CIT(A)'s non-speaking order lacking essential details led to remand for a comprehensive decision. Ultimately, both appeals were allowed for statistical purposes, stressing the importance of detailed information for accurate assessment of peak credits in the assessee's bank account. Case-Laws Income Tax Tue, 29 May 2012 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=214628