Sponsored
    Follow Us:

Case Law Details

Case Name : Veeranna Murthy Raghavendra Deekshith Vs ITO (ITAT Bangalore)
Related Assessment Year : 2017-18
Become a Premium member to Download. If you are already a Premium member, Login here to access.
Sponsored

Veeranna Murthy Raghavendra Deekshith Vs ITO (ITAT Bangalore)

Conclusion: Addition under section 68 on account of large cash deposit made during the 2016 demonetization period was not justified and assessee was required to provide concrete evidence establishing the genuineness of the cash deposits in accordance with CBDT Circular wherein the various instructions had been issued. Tribunal remitted the case back to AO for a fresh assessment, instructing assessee to provide all necessary documents to prove the authenticity of the deposits.

Held: Please become a Premium member. If you are already a Premium member, login here to access the full content.

Sponsored

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Your email address will not be published.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 *

Sponsored
Sponsored
Ads Free tax News and Updates
Sponsored
Search Post by Date
April 2025
M T W T F S S
 123456
78910111213
14151617181920
21222324252627
282930