Opportunity to furnish unsecured-loan confirmations is required before reassessment initiation; proceedings require fresh consideration after taxpayer...
Under-reporting on a first reassessment return attracts penalty, while enhanced misreporting penalty requires proof of a statutory misreporting catego...
Dividend stripping on mutual fund units: the ITAT held that dividend could not be treated as a return of capital or deducted from cost of acquisition without a specific statutory basis. Section 94's anti-dividend stripping rule applies only when its conditions are cumulatively satisfied; here, the required purchase and sale timing conditions were not both met, so the provision was inapplicable. General survey findings and alleged SEBI violations, without material linking the assessee to manipulation, did not justify branding the transaction as sham. The addition was deleted on merits.
Dividend stripping on mutual fund units: the ITAT held that dividend could not be treated as a return of capital or deducted from cost of acquisition without a specific statutory basis. Section 94's anti-dividend stripping rule applies only when its conditions are cumulatively satisfied; here, the required purchase and sale timing conditions were not both met, so the provision was inapplicable. General survey findings and alleged SEBI violations, without material linking the assessee to manipulation, did not justify branding the transaction as sham. The addition was deleted on merits.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.