Appeal allowed; rejection of books unwarranted, s.68/s.69A/s.115BBE additions deleted; s.133A survey and s.143(3)/s.144 framing flawed

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....ITAT allowed the appellant's appeal, holding that the rejection of the books of account by CIT(A) was unwarranted as no cogent defects were demonstrated and conclusions were based on conjecture; the AO's reliance on such rejection to invoke provisions of s.68/s.69A and tax under s.115BBE was unsustainable. The Tribunal observed the survey u/s.133A disclosed no incriminating material, the books were maintained on mercantile basis and audited with true and fair certification, and the assessment was incorrectly framed u/s.143(3) despite alleged rejection requiring s.144. Additions treating demonetized-currency bank deposits as bogus sales were deleted as speculative and resulting trading-loss recalculation was impractical.....