https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=757301 The ITAT Bangalore remitted three disputed additions back to the AO for fresh consideration. For cash deposits during demonetization treated as unexplained cash credit u/s 68, the Tribunal directed the AO to examine whether the case falls within suspicious parameters established in precedent regarding abnormal cash transaction patterns. For unsecured loan receipts, the Tribunal found lower authorities failed to conduct adequate independent inquiry into genuineness and creditworthiness of lenders, requiring proper verification. For agricultural income claimed by the assessee, the Tribunal rejected the argument that prior years' acceptance creates precedent, noting res judicata principles don't apply to income tax proceedings and directing fresh examination of supporting evidence. en-us Thu, 01 Feb 2024 00:00:00 +0530 Wed, 21 Aug 2024 10:23:00 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=757301 The ITAT Bangalore remitted three disputed additions back to the AO for fresh consideration. For cash deposits during demonetization treated as unexplained cash credit u/s 68, the Tribunal directed the AO to examine whether the case falls within suspicious parameters established in precedent regarding abnormal cash transaction patterns. For unsecured loan receipts, the Tribunal found lower authorities failed to conduct adequate independent inquiry into genuineness and creditworthiness of lenders, requiring proper verification. For agricultural income claimed by the assessee, the Tribunal rejected the argument that prior years' acceptance creates precedent, noting res judicata principles don't apply to income tax proceedings and directing fresh examination of supporting evidence. Case-Laws Income Tax Thu, 01 Feb 2024 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=757301