https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=346263 The appeal was allowed in part. The addition of Rs. 1,87,000,000/- on account of unexplained unsecured loans was deleted, and the addition of Rs. 600,000/- on account of unexplained bank deposits was restricted to Rs. 100,000/-. The initiation of penalty proceedings was dismissed as not pressed. The judgment emphasized the importance of the AO bringing material evidence to disprove the details submitted by the assessee and upheld the principle that the assessee should not be penalized for non-appearance of parties in response to summons. en-us Tue, 18 Apr 2017 00:00:00 +0530 Tue, 08 Aug 2017 07:55:00 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=346263 The appeal was allowed in part. The addition of Rs. 1,87,000,000/- on account of unexplained unsecured loans was deleted, and the addition of Rs. 600,000/- on account of unexplained bank deposits was restricted to Rs. 100,000/-. The initiation of penalty proceedings was dismissed as not pressed. The judgment emphasized the importance of the AO bringing material evidence to disprove the details submitted by the assessee and upheld the principle that the assessee should not be penalized for non-appearance of parties in response to summons. Case-Laws Income Tax Tue, 18 Apr 2017 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=346263