https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=777875 ITAT MUMBAI held that the addition under section 11(3) for non-utilisation of accumulated funds was unwarranted. The tribunal accepted the assessee's explanation that the accumulated funds had been applied in earlier years and that the reporting of the sum in Schedule I of the ITR for AY 2018-19 was a "punching error." It found no claim of deduction based on preceding years' accumulated funds in the return or assessment proceedings and rejected the AO's reliance on Goetze (India) as misplaced. Revenue's grounds were dismissed. en-us Tue, 26 Aug 2025 00:00:00 +0530 Thu, 04 Sep 2025 16:05:23 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=777875 ITAT MUMBAI held that the addition under section 11(3) for non-utilisation of accumulated funds was unwarranted. The tribunal accepted the assessee's explanation that the accumulated funds had been applied in earlier years and that the reporting of the sum in Schedule I of the ITR for AY 2018-19 was a "punching error." It found no claim of deduction based on preceding years' accumulated funds in the return or assessment proceedings and rejected the AO's reliance on Goetze (India) as misplaced. Revenue's grounds were dismissed. Case-Laws Income Tax Tue, 26 Aug 2025 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=777875