<?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>Excess Cash and Stock Taxed as Undisclosed Income; Tribunal Partially Allows Appeal, Criticizes AO&#039;s Tax Computation Omission.</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/highlights?id=81416</link>
    <description>Excess cash and stock found during survey proceedings were treated as income from undisclosed sources, liable for taxation u/s 115BBE. The Assessing Officer (AO) ordered taxation but failed to compute tax per Section 115BBE, rendering the order prejudicial to revenue interests. Regarding excess stock, the assessee&#039;s justification was rejected, and the unexplained portion was added to income. However, the AO consciously did not apply Section 115BBE, taking a plausible view that the income emerged from business. The Tribunal considered the AO&#039;s order prejudicial for not charging tax u/s 115BBE on the disclosed income but found no issue with the treatment of excess stock income as business income, as the AO applied their mind. The assessee&#039;s ground was partly allowed.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Tue, 17 Sep 2024 08:37:06 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Tue, 17 Sep 2024 08:37:06 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=768523" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>Excess Cash and Stock Taxed as Undisclosed Income; Tribunal Partially Allows Appeal, Criticizes AO&#039;s Tax Computation Omission.</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/highlights?id=81416</link>
      <description>Excess cash and stock found during survey proceedings were treated as income from undisclosed sources, liable for taxation u/s 115BBE. The Assessing Officer (AO) ordered taxation but failed to compute tax per Section 115BBE, rendering the order prejudicial to revenue interests. Regarding excess stock, the assessee&#039;s justification was rejected, and the unexplained portion was added to income. However, the AO consciously did not apply Section 115BBE, taking a plausible view that the income emerged from business. The Tribunal considered the AO&#039;s order prejudicial for not charging tax u/s 115BBE on the disclosed income but found no issue with the treatment of excess stock income as business income, as the AO applied their mind. The assessee&#039;s ground was partly allowed.</description>
      <category>Highlights</category>
      <law>Income Tax</law>
      <pubDate>Tue, 17 Sep 2024 08:37:06 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/highlights?id=81416</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>