Faceless reassessment jurisdiction turned on retrospective AO definition, with later faceless-assessment changes treated as clarificatory and procedur...
Page of 4805
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
2121 to 2140 of 96100 Results
❮
❯
❯❯
0 / 200
Expand Note
Add to Folder
No Folders have been created
+
Are you sure you want to delete "My most important" ?
RTGS credits claimed as gold-sale proceeds were treated as a benami transaction because the appellant did not prove a prior business relationship with the remitting entities or independently corroborate invoices, purchase bills, ledgers and stock records. The undisputed cash deposit with the alleged benamidar, subsequent RTGS transfers, timing after demonetisation and bank records supported confirmation of the provisional attachment. Denial of cross-examination did not breach natural justice: no intermediary statement existed, the alleged benamidar had been made available but did not appear, and no actual prejudice was shown. The appeal was dismissed.
RTGS credits claimed as gold-sale proceeds were treated as a benami transaction because the appellant did not prove a prior business relationship with the remitting entities or independently corroborate invoices, purchase bills, ledgers and stock records. The undisputed cash deposit with the alleged benamidar, subsequent RTGS transfers, timing after demonetisation and bank records supported confirmation of the provisional attachment. Denial of cross-examination did not breach natural justice: no intermediary statement existed, the alleged benamidar had been made available but did not appear, and no actual prejudice was shown. The appeal was dismissed.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.