https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=761976 The ITAT Patna held that the AO exceeded jurisdiction by making additions outside the scope of limited scrutiny. The assessee's case was selected for scrutiny to examine large cash deposits, but the AO made additions totaling Rs. 1,36,60,875 for peak credit of unexplained deposits and under-reporting of income per Form 26AS, which were not related to the original scrutiny subject matter. The AO failed to convert limited scrutiny to complete scrutiny as required by CBDT Circular 3/2017. Following precedent in Vudatha Vani Rao, the ITAT deleted the additions as being without jurisdiction and allowed the assessee's appeal. en-us Mon, 18 Nov 2024 00:00:00 +0530 Wed, 20 Nov 2024 12:29:00 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=761976 The ITAT Patna held that the AO exceeded jurisdiction by making additions outside the scope of limited scrutiny. The assessee's case was selected for scrutiny to examine large cash deposits, but the AO made additions totaling Rs. 1,36,60,875 for peak credit of unexplained deposits and under-reporting of income per Form 26AS, which were not related to the original scrutiny subject matter. The AO failed to convert limited scrutiny to complete scrutiny as required by CBDT Circular 3/2017. Following precedent in Vudatha Vani Rao, the ITAT deleted the additions as being without jurisdiction and allowed the assessee's appeal. Case-Laws Income Tax Mon, 18 Nov 2024 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=761976