Transaction value rejection requires reliable corroboration; refundable VAT is excluded and temporary registration does not defeat new-vehicle exempti...
Appellate jurisdiction remains available where a wrist-worn gold ornament cannot conclusively be characterised as imported baggage at the preliminary ...
Written complaint requirement bars cognizance on police reports for securities offences, while unsupported breach of trust and cheating allegations fa...
Risk-based postal import clearance standardises electronic assessment, document requests, duty realisation and delivery controls at Foreign Post Offic...
Customs Cargo Service Provider appointment extends custodianship to additional terminal land, subject to cargo-control, security and licence condition...
ITAT applied the real income theory to hold that alleged bonus or commission receivable could not be taxed on a due basis where there was no proof of receipt, no employer provisioning, and no document showing a legal right to receive the amount; the deletion of that addition was upheld. On the unexplained money issue, the Tribunal accepted third-party confirmations, agreements, revenue records and section 133(6) responses admitting cash handed over for proposed land transactions, and directed deletion of Rs. 85,00,000. For the remaining cash addition, it held that bare assertions of cash savings and business receipts were insufficient without corroboration, so the relief already granted by the first appellate authority was sustained and no further interference was warranted.
ITAT applied the real income theory to hold that alleged bonus or commission receivable could not be taxed on a due basis where there was no proof of receipt, no employer provisioning, and no document showing a legal right to receive the amount; the deletion of that addition was upheld. On the unexplained money issue, the Tribunal accepted third-party confirmations, agreements, revenue records and section 133(6) responses admitting cash handed over for proposed land transactions, and directed deletion of Rs. 85,00,000. For the remaining cash addition, it held that bare assertions of cash savings and business receipts were insufficient without corroboration, so the relief already granted by the first appellate authority was sustained and no further interference was warranted.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.
TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
of 4811 
Join Channel 
