https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=460914 The Court dismissed the Revenue's appeals, upholding the decision of the ld. CIT (A) to delete additions related to undisclosed sources and unaccounted commission. The Court found that the assessee acted as a conduit entity, and the income in question had already been disclosed and taxed in the hands of the main beneficiary, Anand Kumar Jain. Thus, protective additions were unjustified. The Court emphasized that income disclosed by the primary taxpayer should not be taxed again through conduit entities, affirming the principle against double taxation. The appeals for subsequent years were also dismissed based on similar findings. en-us Wed, 16 Oct 2024 00:00:00 +0530 Sat, 01 Mar 2025 14:25:08 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=460914 The Court dismissed the Revenue's appeals, upholding the decision of the ld. CIT (A) to delete additions related to undisclosed sources and unaccounted commission. The Court found that the assessee acted as a conduit entity, and the income in question had already been disclosed and taxed in the hands of the main beneficiary, Anand Kumar Jain. Thus, protective additions were unjustified. The Court emphasized that income disclosed by the primary taxpayer should not be taxed again through conduit entities, affirming the principle against double taxation. The appeals for subsequent years were also dismissed based on similar findings. Case-Laws Income Tax Wed, 16 Oct 2024 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=460914