Follow Us:

Case Law Details

Case Name : Ullattil Sillu Vs ITO (ITAT Cochin)
Related Assessment Year : 2017-2018
Become a Premium member to Download. If you are already a Premium member, Login here to access.
Ullattil Sillu Vs ITO (ITAT Cochin) Interval between date of cash withdrawal & deposit in bank does not warrant addition: ITAT Cochin The case of Ullattil Sillu vs. ITO (ITAT Cochin) concerns the treatment of cash deposits made during the demonetization period. The assessee had filed a return declaring an income of Rs. 2,83,130, but the Assessing Officer (AO) added Rs. 2,42,000 as unexplained money, claiming that the deposits made into the bank were not substantiated. The assessee explained that the deposits were sourced from cash withdrawals made on August 5, 2016, amounting to Rs. 3,03,0...
This is premium content. Please become a Premium member. If you are already a member, login here to access the full content.

Author Bio

CA Vijayakumar Shetty qualified in 1994 and in practice since then. Founding partner of Shetty & Co. He is a graduate from St Aloysius College, Mangalore . View Full Profile

My Published Posts

Penny Stock Addition Fails: ITAT Says Suspicion Cannot Replace Evidence Borrowed Satisfaction: ITAT Quashes Penny Stock Additions in Multiple Family Cases Statement Alone Cannot Justify ‘On-Money’ Addition: ITAT Mumbai Genuine ITR Mistake Cannot Lead to Tax on Wrong Income: ITAT Mumbai AO Cannot Reopen on the Same Material Examined in U/s 153C Assessment: ITAT Quashes ₹2.90 Crore Addition View More Published Posts

Join Taxguru’s Network for Latest updates on Income Tax, GST, Company Law, Corporate Laws and other related subjects.

Leave a Comment

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

Search Post by Date
June 2026
M T W T F S S
1234567
891011121314
15161718192021
22232425262728
2930