https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=448349 ITAT held that additions treating company-paid amounts as unexplained expenditure under s.69C and as perquisite under s.17(2) could not be sustained. Once payments appeared in the company's books and were routed through regular banking channels, they could not be added as unexplained expenditure in the assessee's hands; further, CIT(A)'s recharacterisation as a perquisite constituted a new income stream beyond his enhancement powers and was made without the requisite s.251(2) notice. The additions by AO and CIT(A) were deleted and the assessee's grounds were allowed. en-us Fri, 12 Jan 2024 00:00:00 +0530 Tue, 16 Sep 2025 13:05:00 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=448349 ITAT held that additions treating company-paid amounts as unexplained expenditure under s.69C and as perquisite under s.17(2) could not be sustained. Once payments appeared in the company's books and were routed through regular banking channels, they could not be added as unexplained expenditure in the assessee's hands; further, CIT(A)'s recharacterisation as a perquisite constituted a new income stream beyond his enhancement powers and was made without the requisite s.251(2) notice. The additions by AO and CIT(A) were deleted and the assessee's grounds were allowed. Case-Laws Income Tax Fri, 12 Jan 2024 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=448349