Charitable trust income application permits verified capital expenditure but rejects deferred pre-operative claims and requires reconsideration of con...
Reinsurance premium deductions require established regulatory breaches, while independently acquired software qualifies within the computer depreciati...
Rectification of mistake remains limited to self-evident record errors, preventing merits review through miscellaneous applications and preserving fin...
Tender creditworthiness conditions may extend to de facto Promoter Directors, with post-participation challenges generally barred absent arbitrariness...
Corporate representation in PMLA summons proceedings permitted through an authorised signatory, subject to directors' continuing cooperation and atten...
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 4807 
Join Channel 
