<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?>
<?xml-stylesheet type="text/xsl" href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_sitemap/rss_feed_blog.xsl?v=1750492856"?>
<rss version="2.0" xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom">
  <channel>
    <title>2022 (4) TMI 1592 - ITAT INDORE</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=312249</link>
    <description>The ITAT Indore ruled against revenue on multiple grounds. The tribunal found no violation of Rule 46A regarding additional evidence admission, as CIT(A) properly forwarded evidence to AO and considered the remand report. For Section 153A assessments, additions under Section 40A were deleted since no incriminating material from search supported disallowances in completed assessment years. The tribunal upheld CIT(A)&#039;s deletion of unexplained expenditure additions, finding AO&#039;s conclusions about unclaimed interest expenses factually incorrect. Regarding suppressed profit, the tribunal confirmed CIT(A)&#039;s application of 1.5% net profit rate on suppressed sales. For undisclosed income from capital/loan differences, the tribunal supported deletion as liability differences don&#039;t constitute taxable income. Finally, unaccounted cash payment additions were properly deleted due to insufficient corroborative evidence beyond seized excel sheets.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Mon, 18 Apr 2022 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Thu, 08 Feb 2024 18:14:05 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=742974" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2022 (4) TMI 1592 - ITAT INDORE</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=312249</link>
      <description>The ITAT Indore ruled against revenue on multiple grounds. The tribunal found no violation of Rule 46A regarding additional evidence admission, as CIT(A) properly forwarded evidence to AO and considered the remand report. For Section 153A assessments, additions under Section 40A were deleted since no incriminating material from search supported disallowances in completed assessment years. The tribunal upheld CIT(A)&#039;s deletion of unexplained expenditure additions, finding AO&#039;s conclusions about unclaimed interest expenses factually incorrect. Regarding suppressed profit, the tribunal confirmed CIT(A)&#039;s application of 1.5% net profit rate on suppressed sales. For undisclosed income from capital/loan differences, the tribunal supported deletion as liability differences don&#039;t constitute taxable income. Finally, unaccounted cash payment additions were properly deleted due to insufficient corroborative evidence beyond seized excel sheets.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Income Tax</law>
      <pubDate>Mon, 18 Apr 2022 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=312249</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>