Post-export shipping bill conversion protects drawback claims where unchallenged conversion orders cannot be reopened through administrative time limi...
Demonetisation-period cash sales already offered as income could not, merely because they occurred during demonetisation, shift the burden to establish unexplained cash credit where physical and recorded stock supported the sales and recorded purchases remained undisputed. The High Court upheld deletion of the alleged bogus-sales addition, finding no basis for the forensic allegation of backdated entries; rejection of books for gross-profit estimation did not displace relevant stock reconciliations. It also declined to interfere with the restricted excess-stock addition and deletion of the survey cash-discrepancy addition, because the concurrent factual findings showed neither perversity nor ignored relevant material. No substantial question of law arose under section 260A, and the Revenue's appeal was dismissed.
Demonetisation-period cash sales already offered as income could not, merely because they occurred during demonetisation, shift the burden to establish unexplained cash credit where physical and recorded stock supported the sales and recorded purchases remained undisputed. The High Court upheld deletion of the alleged bogus-sales addition, finding no basis for the forensic allegation of backdated entries; rejection of books for gross-profit estimation did not displace relevant stock reconciliations. It also declined to interfere with the restricted excess-stock addition and deletion of the survey cash-discrepancy addition, because the concurrent factual findings showed neither perversity nor ignored relevant material. No substantial question of law arose under section 260A, and the Revenue's appeal was dismissed.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.
TaxTMI 
of 4947 
Get Daily Updates 
