Mis-declaration and Concealment: confiscation affirmed, transaction value re-determined and mandatory penalty sustained; redemption allowed on payment...
Page of 4821
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
5761 to 5780 of 96408 Results
❮
❯
❯❯
0 / 200
Expand Note
Add to Folder
No Folders have been created
+
Are you sure you want to delete "My most important" ?
Reassessment initiated under an incorrect and non-operative PAN was treated as a jurisdictional defect, not a mere procedural lapse, because the assessee had disclosed the transactions under the correct PAN and the reply under section 148A was not considered before issuing notice; the proceedings were also held time-barred. On merits, cash deposits were accepted as business receipts where the books and explanation were unrebutted, and rejection of accounts solely for want of a tax audit was unjustified. The FDR investments were likewise explained from renewal of earlier deposits and the same business receipts, so the addition could not survive and double taxation of the same funds was impermissible.
Reassessment initiated under an incorrect and non-operative PAN was treated as a jurisdictional defect, not a mere procedural lapse, because the assessee had disclosed the transactions under the correct PAN and the reply under section 148A was not considered before issuing notice; the proceedings were also held time-barred. On merits, cash deposits were accepted as business receipts where the books and explanation were unrebutted, and rejection of accounts solely for want of a tax audit was unjustified. The FDR investments were likewise explained from renewal of earlier deposits and the same business receipts, so the addition could not survive and double taxation of the same funds was impermissible.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.
TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
of 4821 
Join Channel 
