Specified income of Baddi Barotiwala Nalagarh Development Authority receives conditional tax exemption, retrospectively covering its designated assess...
Specified development authority income receives retrospective tax exemption, subject to non-commercial activity, unchanged income sources, and return-...
Unified Brand India framework introduces voluntary Trust Mark certification and funding support for export branding, packaging and global promotional ...
Origin Declaration authentication governs preferential tariff claims under India-UK CETA, requiring a validated reference number before import clearan...
Separate assessment orders for different years remain valid when distinct notices and hearing opportunities prevent prejudice from combined proceeding...
Defined public benefit can retain charitable character; registration renewal requires examining genuine activities and legal compliance, not surplus a...
Capital reduction is distinct from share buy-back, preventing buy-back tax; restructuring interest and related business deductions also survive scruti...
Page of 4792
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
981 to 1000 of 95833 Results
❮
❯
❯❯
0 / 200
Expand Note
Add to Folder
No Folders have been created
+
Are you sure you want to delete "My most important" ?
An ITAT deleted an addition under section 69C for alleged on-money payment because the assessment rested only on an investigation report, a seized excel sheet naming another person, and a general builder's employee statement. The assessee's banking-channel payment evidence was not rebutted, and no independent corroboration of cash payment was brought on record. The third-party statement was untested by cross-examination and could not, by itself, sustain the addition. The appeal was partly allowed.
An ITAT deleted an addition under section 69C for alleged on-money payment because the assessment rested only on an investigation report, a seized excel sheet naming another person, and a general builder's employee statement. The assessee's banking-channel payment evidence was not rebutted, and no independent corroboration of cash payment was brought on record. The third-party statement was untested by cross-examination and could not, by itself, sustain the addition. The appeal was partly allowed.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.
TaxTMI 
of 4792
Join Channel
TaxTMI 
