<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?>
<?xml-stylesheet type="text/xsl" href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_sitemap/rss_feed_blog.xsl?v=1750492856"?>
<rss version="2.0" xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom">
  <channel>
    <title>Beneficial ownership of bank account controls section 68 addition where deposits were made in trust account, not assessee&#039;s account.</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/highlights?id=100115</link>
    <description>ITAT deleted an addition under section 68 where cash deposits were made in a bank account standing in the name of a separately assessed trust, holding that the account did not belong to the assessee but to Deepak Gupta Education Trust. The assessee&#039;s role as authorised signatory, together with the affidavit and trust records, showed only representative operation of the account. In the absence of corroborative material establishing beneficial ownership or that the deposits were the assessee&#039;s undisclosed income, PAN linkage and signatory status alone were insufficient to sustain the addition in his hands. The Revenue&#039;s appeal was dismissed, while the Tribunal made no finding on any possible addition in the hands of the trust.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Tue, 26 May 2026 08:24:42 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Tue, 26 May 2026 08:24:45 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=903753" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>Beneficial ownership of bank account controls section 68 addition where deposits were made in trust account, not assessee&#039;s account.</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/highlights?id=100115</link>
      <description>ITAT deleted an addition under section 68 where cash deposits were made in a bank account standing in the name of a separately assessed trust, holding that the account did not belong to the assessee but to Deepak Gupta Education Trust. The assessee&#039;s role as authorised signatory, together with the affidavit and trust records, showed only representative operation of the account. In the absence of corroborative material establishing beneficial ownership or that the deposits were the assessee&#039;s undisclosed income, PAN linkage and signatory status alone were insufficient to sustain the addition in his hands. The Revenue&#039;s appeal was dismissed, while the Tribunal made no finding on any possible addition in the hands of the trust.</description>
      <category>Highlights</category>
      <law>Income Tax</law>
      <pubDate>Tue, 26 May 2026 08:24:42 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/highlights?id=100115</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>