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

Section 68 Additions Fail: Documentary Evidence Cannot Be Ignored Without Enquiry Commission Disallowance Remanded – 133(6) Non-Response Not Sufficient; Ad-hoc Expenses Cut to 10% Stamp Duty vs Actual Value Dispute: ITAT Orders DVO Valuation ITAT Bangalore Remands ₹49L Sec 68 Addition & ₹3.74L TDS Disallowance for Fresh Verification Penalty U/s 272A(1)(d) Deleted: Reasonable Cause Subsequent Compliance Accepted 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Your email address will not be published.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 *

Ads Free tax News and Updates
Search Post by Date
April 2026
M T W T F S S
 12345
6789101112
13141516171819
20212223242526
27282930