Tax Management India. Com
Law and Practice  :  Digital eBook
Research is most exciting & rewarding
  TMI - Tax Management India. Com
Follow us:
  Facebook   Twitter   Linkedin   Telegram
Income Tax - Highlights / Catch Notes

Home Highlights June 2024 Year 2024 This

The Appellate Tribunal held that the addition of Rs. 51.20 lacs ...


Unexplained investment discrepancy ruled in favor of assessee by appellate tribunal. No proof of payment, addition not justified.

Case Laws     Income Tax

June 22, 2024

The Appellate Tribunal held that the addition of Rs. 51.20 lacs as unexplained investment u/ss 69 or 56(2)(x)/6(2)(vii) was unjustified as there was no evidence of actual payment to vendors. Section 69 requires actual investment, not just stamp value. The lower authorities erred in making the addition, which is not taxable for a partnership firm u/s 56(2)(x) for the relevant assessment year. The decision favored the assessee, and the appeal was allowed.

View Source

 


 

You may also like:

  1. The Appellate Tribunal considered the legality of additions based on a diary seized from a third party. The Tribunal held that the presumption u/s 132(4A) of the Act...

  2. The Appellate Tribunal considered unexplained cash deposits during demonetization. The Tribunal noted the assessee's agricultural income and expenses but found...

  3. The Appellate Tribunal addressed the claim of deduction u/s 32AD for additional investment allowance on an investment made in the financial year 2015-16. The issue arose...

  4. The Appellate Tribunal addressed the validity of reopening assessment under section 147 and addition under section 69A. The Tribunal held that the AO had sufficient...

  5. Addition u/s. 69A - unexplained cash deposits in the bank account - The Tribunal found the explanation provided by the assessee regarding the sale consideration for real...

  6. The Income Tax Appellate Tribunal (ITAT) adjudicated on various additions made by the Assessing Officer (AO) as unexplained/bogus credits or trading liabilities. The...

  7. The Appellate Tribunal considered a case involving a revision u/s 263 regarding the estimation of unexplained investment by the Assessing Officer (AO) based on...

  8. Unexplained investment u/s 69 – Assessee paid up additional stamp duty on valuation - This by itself would not mean that the assessee made any unexplained investment - HC

  9. The Appellate Tribunal considered a case involving penalty u/s 271(1)(c) for furnishing inaccurate particulars of income. The Assessee did not disclose non-eligibility...

  10. Addition u/s 69B r.w.s.115BBE - during the course of survey action discrepancies were found on account of physical verification of stock vis-a-vis regular books of...

  11. The Appellate Tribunal considered the issue of condonation of delay in filing appeals, which exceeded 400 days, due to unexplained cash deposits and protective additions...

  12. Unexplained investment - The basis of addition made in the present case is the source of investment remaining unexplained. Now, the assessee having explained the source...

  13. Penalty levied u/s 271(1)(c) - Transfer pricing adjustment - assessee advanced interest free loan to its AE - The Tribunal noted that the assessee had disclosed all...

  14. Assessment u/s 153C - Undisclosed investment u/s 69 r.w.s 115BBE - Whether incriminating material belonging to Assessee found during the course of search on the basis of...

  15. The Appellate Tribunal addressed the addition u/s 69 concerning unexplained investment. The issue stemmed from an agreement displaying the individual name of the...

 

Quick Updates:Latest Updates