https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=766692 ITAT Delhi held that protective assessment u/s 68 for unexplained entries cannot be sustained when assessee acts merely as a conduit. Both AO and CIT(A) found assessee was not the real owner of bank deposits and only facilitated transfer to ultimate beneficiaries. Following precedents in Zed Enterprises, Shivij Garments, Zen Tradex, and Round Square Exim cases, ITAT deleted protective additions. Commission income addition also deleted as already assessed in hands of main entry operators. Appeal dismissed. en-us Wed, 22 Jan 2025 00:00:00 +0530 Fri, 28 Feb 2025 17:10:29 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=766692 ITAT Delhi held that protective assessment u/s 68 for unexplained entries cannot be sustained when assessee acts merely as a conduit. Both AO and CIT(A) found assessee was not the real owner of bank deposits and only facilitated transfer to ultimate beneficiaries. Following precedents in Zed Enterprises, Shivij Garments, Zen Tradex, and Round Square Exim cases, ITAT deleted protective additions. Commission income addition also deleted as already assessed in hands of main entry operators. Appeal dismissed. Case-Laws Income Tax Wed, 22 Jan 2025 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=766692