https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=253085 The Revenue's appeal against the CIT(A)'s deletion of an addition for unexplained investment was dismissed. The CIT(A) erred in deleting the addition, and the Revenue's contentions on using CPWD rates and cost differences were upheld. The cross objection challenging an addition confirmed by the CIT(A) succeeded due to an invalid reference to the DVO without rejecting books of account. The Tribunal found no defects to justify re-estimating the net profit rate on hospital receipts and upheld the addition for a difference in fees. The Tribunal dismissed the Revenue's appeal and partly allowed the assessee's cross objection, emphasizing adherence to legal precedents. en-us Mon, 10 Nov 2014 00:00:00 +0530 Fri, 14 Nov 2014 06:21:15 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=253085 The Revenue's appeal against the CIT(A)'s deletion of an addition for unexplained investment was dismissed. The CIT(A) erred in deleting the addition, and the Revenue's contentions on using CPWD rates and cost differences were upheld. The cross objection challenging an addition confirmed by the CIT(A) succeeded due to an invalid reference to the DVO without rejecting books of account. The Tribunal found no defects to justify re-estimating the net profit rate on hospital receipts and upheld the addition for a difference in fees. The Tribunal dismissed the Revenue's appeal and partly allowed the assessee's cross objection, emphasizing adherence to legal precedents. Case-Laws Income Tax Mon, 10 Nov 2014 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=253085