https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=429944 The CIT(A) upheld the deletion of additions for unaccounted income made by the AO, citing that the income was already disclosed by a partner. The failure to explain seized documents was attributed to the partner's illness and subsequent death. The CIT(A) criticized the AO for not considering the nature of commission income in the 'Angadia' business, leading to incorrect taxation. Additionally, the protective addition for seized cash was deleted as it was already declared by the partner individually. The CIT(A) dismissed the Revenue's appeals, affirming the deletions and concluding no further assessments were warranted for the assessee firm. en-us Mon, 17 Oct 2022 00:00:00 +0530 Tue, 08 Nov 2022 09:21:18 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=429944 The CIT(A) upheld the deletion of additions for unaccounted income made by the AO, citing that the income was already disclosed by a partner. The failure to explain seized documents was attributed to the partner's illness and subsequent death. The CIT(A) criticized the AO for not considering the nature of commission income in the 'Angadia' business, leading to incorrect taxation. Additionally, the protective addition for seized cash was deleted as it was already declared by the partner individually. The CIT(A) dismissed the Revenue's appeals, affirming the deletions and concluding no further assessments were warranted for the assessee firm. Case-Laws Income Tax Mon, 17 Oct 2022 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=429944