https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=462854 Additions deleted in a search assessment under Section 153A, made on account of unexplained credits under Section 68, were not interfered with because the Tribunal had applied the settled rule in Kabul Chawla on the same search and the same view had already been upheld in earlier proceedings involving the same assessee. The Delhi HC found no legal basis to disturb that consistent approach in Revenue's Section 260A challenge, and held that no substantial question of law arose. The Tribunal's deletion of the additions was therefore sustained and the Revenue's appeals failed. en-us Mon, 30 Oct 2017 00:00:00 +0530 Mon, 21 Jul 2025 17:23:00 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=462854 Additions deleted in a search assessment under Section 153A, made on account of unexplained credits under Section 68, were not interfered with because the Tribunal had applied the settled rule in Kabul Chawla on the same search and the same view had already been upheld in earlier proceedings involving the same assessee. The Delhi HC found no legal basis to disturb that consistent approach in Revenue's Section 260A challenge, and held that no substantial question of law arose. The Tribunal's deletion of the additions was therefore sustained and the Revenue's appeals failed. Case-Laws Income Tax Mon, 30 Oct 2017 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=462854