https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=423797 The Tribunal upheld the Ld. Commissioner's decisions on all issues, dismissing the Revenue's appeal. The additions challenged by the Revenue were deleted based on confirmations and explanations provided by the Assessee, with no reason found to overturn the Ld. Commissioner's conclusions. The disallowance under section 40A(2)(b) was rejected as the amount was considered an advance, not expenses. The addition under section 68 for deducting an advance from creditors without disclosure was accepted as a mistake rectified in the subsequent year. en-us Tue, 31 May 2022 00:00:00 +0530 Wed, 15 Jun 2022 09:19:12 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=423797 The Tribunal upheld the Ld. Commissioner's decisions on all issues, dismissing the Revenue's appeal. The additions challenged by the Revenue were deleted based on confirmations and explanations provided by the Assessee, with no reason found to overturn the Ld. Commissioner's conclusions. The disallowance under section 40A(2)(b) was rejected as the amount was considered an advance, not expenses. The addition under section 68 for deducting an advance from creditors without disclosure was accepted as a mistake rectified in the subsequent year. Case-Laws Income Tax Tue, 31 May 2022 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=423797