https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=283277 The appeal by the Department against the CIT(A)'s order for AY 2001-02 was dismissed. The CIT(A) had deleted the addition made under section 68 of the IT Act, which the Department argued were accommodation entries but the ITAT found to be refunds of advances for goods not supplied. Additionally, the CIT(A) had also deleted the unexplained expenditure addition of Rs. 16,500. The ITAT upheld the CIT(A)'s decision, rejecting the department's arguments and dismissing their appeal. en-us Tue, 07 Dec 2010 00:00:00 +0530 Tue, 17 Sep 2019 14:40:11 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=283277 The appeal by the Department against the CIT(A)'s order for AY 2001-02 was dismissed. The CIT(A) had deleted the addition made under section 68 of the IT Act, which the Department argued were accommodation entries but the ITAT found to be refunds of advances for goods not supplied. Additionally, the CIT(A) had also deleted the unexplained expenditure addition of Rs. 16,500. The ITAT upheld the CIT(A)'s decision, rejecting the department's arguments and dismissing their appeal. Case-Laws Income Tax Tue, 07 Dec 2010 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=283277