https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=343581 The Tribunal allowed both appeals, ruling that the re-assessment proceedings lacked justification as there was no new tangible material, and the addition under Section 68 for unexplained capital increase was deemed unwarranted. The Tribunal found that the assessee had adequately explained the source of the capital increase, highlighting errors in the AO and CIT(A)'s allegations. The Tribunal emphasized the necessity of precise fact-finding and criticized the baseless accusations made by the tax authorities. en-us Tue, 23 May 2017 00:00:00 +0530 Mon, 29 May 2017 08:10:47 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=343581 The Tribunal allowed both appeals, ruling that the re-assessment proceedings lacked justification as there was no new tangible material, and the addition under Section 68 for unexplained capital increase was deemed unwarranted. The Tribunal found that the assessee had adequately explained the source of the capital increase, highlighting errors in the AO and CIT(A)'s allegations. The Tribunal emphasized the necessity of precise fact-finding and criticized the baseless accusations made by the tax authorities. Case-Laws Income Tax Tue, 23 May 2017 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=343581