https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=775592 The ITAT JAIPUR allowed the assessee's appeal against the AO's addition under section 69A for unexplained money. The AO initially alleged a credit of Rs. 3,29,51,200, but evidence supported only Rs. 1,92,55,560, which was undisputed by the revenue. The assessee submitted additional evidence under rule 46A, admitted by the CIT(A), who directed the AO to comment but received no response. The CIT(A) held that the entire credit could not be treated as income and applied an 8% turnover-based income computation under section 44AD, considering the nature of business and affidavits submitted. The tribunal found no merit in the revenue's grounds, noting the AO did not dispute the third-party evidence. Consequently, the income was not computed at 8% but accepted as per the affidavit, and the appeal was allowed. en-us Tue, 03 Jun 2025 00:00:00 +0530 Mon, 28 Jul 2025 08:28:00 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=775592 The ITAT JAIPUR allowed the assessee's appeal against the AO's addition under section 69A for unexplained money. The AO initially alleged a credit of Rs. 3,29,51,200, but evidence supported only Rs. 1,92,55,560, which was undisputed by the revenue. The assessee submitted additional evidence under rule 46A, admitted by the CIT(A), who directed the AO to comment but received no response. The CIT(A) held that the entire credit could not be treated as income and applied an 8% turnover-based income computation under section 44AD, considering the nature of business and affidavits submitted. The tribunal found no merit in the revenue's grounds, noting the AO did not dispute the third-party evidence. Consequently, the income was not computed at 8% but accepted as per the affidavit, and the appeal was allowed. Case-Laws Income Tax Tue, 03 Jun 2025 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=775592