https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=761319 ITAT rejected assessee's rectification application under section 254. The tribunal found no apparent mistake in its order regarding three claims. First, assessee's argument that CIT(A)'s order lacked DIN was rejected as this issue wasn't raised during original appeal proceedings. Second, the tribunal properly considered CBDT instructions regarding household savings, making addition based on seized demonetized currency, not mere statements. Third, 60% tax rate under section 115BBE was correctly applied following Kerala HC precedent. However, ITAT acknowledged missing interest computation under section 234A and remitted this issue to AO for recalculation, allowing benefit of seized cash as self-assessment payment. en-us Mon, 10 Jun 2024 00:00:00 +0530 Thu, 07 Nov 2024 10:18:00 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=761319 ITAT rejected assessee's rectification application under section 254. The tribunal found no apparent mistake in its order regarding three claims. First, assessee's argument that CIT(A)'s order lacked DIN was rejected as this issue wasn't raised during original appeal proceedings. Second, the tribunal properly considered CBDT instructions regarding household savings, making addition based on seized demonetized currency, not mere statements. Third, 60% tax rate under section 115BBE was correctly applied following Kerala HC precedent. However, ITAT acknowledged missing interest computation under section 234A and remitted this issue to AO for recalculation, allowing benefit of seized cash as self-assessment payment. Case-Laws Income Tax Mon, 10 Jun 2024 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=761319