https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=757409 The ITAT Delhi ruled in favor of the assessee on multiple grounds. The tribunal held that additional income from jewellery stock valuation discrepancies discovered during search should be taxed at normal rates, not the 60% rate under section 115BBE, since the search occurred before the amendment's notification date of 15.12.2016. Regarding cash deposits during demonetization, the tribunal found no basis for addition under section 68 as sales were properly recorded, comparable to previous years, and justified by festival season increases. The tribunal upheld CIT(A)'s deletion of ad hoc 10% disallowance on advertisement expenses, noting books weren't rejected and vouchers were subsequently produced showing proper payments with TDS deduction. en-us Tue, 13 Aug 2024 00:00:00 +0530 Sat, 24 Aug 2024 09:04:44 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=757409 The ITAT Delhi ruled in favor of the assessee on multiple grounds. The tribunal held that additional income from jewellery stock valuation discrepancies discovered during search should be taxed at normal rates, not the 60% rate under section 115BBE, since the search occurred before the amendment's notification date of 15.12.2016. Regarding cash deposits during demonetization, the tribunal found no basis for addition under section 68 as sales were properly recorded, comparable to previous years, and justified by festival season increases. The tribunal upheld CIT(A)'s deletion of ad hoc 10% disallowance on advertisement expenses, noting books weren't rejected and vouchers were subsequently produced showing proper payments with TDS deduction. Case-Laws Income Tax Tue, 13 Aug 2024 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=757409