https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=331077 The Tribunal upheld the CIT(A)'s decision to limit the addition to the peak credit amount in an undisclosed bank account, rejecting the Revenue's argument to tax the entire deposit. Emphasizing the importance of disclosure and consistency, the Tribunal considered previous assessments and lack of documentary evidence, affirming the CIT(A)'s order based on the totality of facts. The application of section 68 and the principle of res judicata were pivotal in resolving the case concerning unexplained cash credits, highlighting the necessity for substantiated explanations in tax proceedings. en-us Thu, 30 Jun 2016 00:00:00 +0530 Fri, 12 Aug 2016 13:20:47 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=331077 The Tribunal upheld the CIT(A)'s decision to limit the addition to the peak credit amount in an undisclosed bank account, rejecting the Revenue's argument to tax the entire deposit. Emphasizing the importance of disclosure and consistency, the Tribunal considered previous assessments and lack of documentary evidence, affirming the CIT(A)'s order based on the totality of facts. The application of section 68 and the principle of res judicata were pivotal in resolving the case concerning unexplained cash credits, highlighting the necessity for substantiated explanations in tax proceedings. Case-Laws Income Tax Thu, 30 Jun 2016 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=331077