https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=417218 The Tribunal dismissed the Revenue's appeal, ruling that the excess stock should be treated as business income, not unexplained investment under Section 69. It was held that the amended provisions of Section 115BBE did not apply retrospectively as the search occurred before the amendment date. The Tribunal upheld the CIT(A)'s decision to apply the normal tax rate to the excess stock and rejected the Revenue's arguments. en-us Thu, 06 Jan 2022 00:00:00 +0530 Tue, 18 Jan 2022 08:45:28 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=417218 The Tribunal dismissed the Revenue's appeal, ruling that the excess stock should be treated as business income, not unexplained investment under Section 69. It was held that the amended provisions of Section 115BBE did not apply retrospectively as the search occurred before the amendment date. The Tribunal upheld the CIT(A)'s decision to apply the normal tax rate to the excess stock and rejected the Revenue's arguments. Case-Laws Income Tax Thu, 06 Jan 2022 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=417218