https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=286988 The Tribunal remanded the issue of addition of Rs. 78,00,000 as bogus liability and undisclosed income back to the Assessing Officer for fresh examination, citing lack of clear examination on certain transactions. It upheld the admission of additional evidence under Rule 46A and deletion of Rs. 38,00,000 as bogus liability, noting no adverse material against the assessee. The deletion of Rs. 31,00,000 out of Rs. 40,00,000 as unexplained cash deposits was confirmed, as the source was explained and confirmed. The Tribunal agreed that the Rs. 4,46,75,000 received from M/s Hash Builders Pvt. Ltd. was not income, dismissing the Revenue's appeal and confirming the CIT(A)'s decisions. en-us Mon, 01 Jan 2018 00:00:00 +0530 Tue, 24 Mar 2020 10:20:22 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=286988 The Tribunal remanded the issue of addition of Rs. 78,00,000 as bogus liability and undisclosed income back to the Assessing Officer for fresh examination, citing lack of clear examination on certain transactions. It upheld the admission of additional evidence under Rule 46A and deletion of Rs. 38,00,000 as bogus liability, noting no adverse material against the assessee. The deletion of Rs. 31,00,000 out of Rs. 40,00,000 as unexplained cash deposits was confirmed, as the source was explained and confirmed. The Tribunal agreed that the Rs. 4,46,75,000 received from M/s Hash Builders Pvt. Ltd. was not income, dismissing the Revenue's appeal and confirming the CIT(A)'s decisions. Case-Laws Income Tax Mon, 01 Jan 2018 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=286988