Tip: Use multiple words for precise results (e.g. “penalty section 271”)
Tip: Use multiple words for precise results (e.g. “penalty section 271”)
Browse by Pronouncement Date
68 cases — 1 Apr 2026
Sorted by date
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE VINOD KUMAR,HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE DINESH MEHTA
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE DINESH MEHTA,HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE VINOD KUMAR
The Tribunal held that the addition related to renovation and interior decoration of the shop was beyond the scope of the Pr. CIT's directions and should be deleted. The Tribunal also found that the excess stock represented income generated from business activities and directed its deletion from additions. However, the Tribunal found no merit in the assessee's explanations regarding excess cash and dismissed that ground of appeal.
Showing 1–20 of 68 · Page 1 of 4
The Tribunal held that the addition for unexplained cash deposits (SBNs) was valid as the assessee failed to prove the source of the deposits. The Tribunal also held that the deletion of addition for agricultural income by the CIT(A) was incorrect and directed the AO to accept the declared agricultural income. The Tribunal restored the addition for under-reporting of business profit, holding that the rejection of books of accounts by the AO was justified.