https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=753304 ITAT Jaipur allowed the assessee's appeal regarding unexplained cash deposits. The assessee successfully proved through third-party evidence and registered power of attorney that he was not the real owner of cash deposits in his bank account. The deposits were received from another party and transferred to specified individuals under power of attorney arrangements. CIT(A) incorrectly rejected the explanation merely because the power of attorney document did not mention specific amounts. ITAT held that only brokerage income should be taxable for the assessee, directing Revenue to pursue other parties if necessary. en-us Wed, 10 Jan 2024 00:00:00 +0530 Thu, 30 May 2024 12:10:00 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=753304 ITAT Jaipur allowed the assessee's appeal regarding unexplained cash deposits. The assessee successfully proved through third-party evidence and registered power of attorney that he was not the real owner of cash deposits in his bank account. The deposits were received from another party and transferred to specified individuals under power of attorney arrangements. CIT(A) incorrectly rejected the explanation merely because the power of attorney document did not mention specific amounts. ITAT held that only brokerage income should be taxable for the assessee, directing Revenue to pursue other parties if necessary. Case-Laws Income Tax Wed, 10 Jan 2024 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=753304