Transaction value rejection requires reliable corroboration; refundable VAT is excluded and temporary registration does not defeat new-vehicle exempti...
Appellate jurisdiction remains available where a wrist-worn gold ornament cannot conclusively be characterised as imported baggage at the preliminary ...
Written complaint requirement bars cognizance on police reports for securities offences, while unsupported breach of trust and cheating allegations fa...
Page of 4801
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
341 to 360 of 96001 Results
❮
❯
❯❯
0 / 200
Expand Note
Add to Folder
No Folders have been created
+
Are you sure you want to delete "My most important" ?
Addition of deemed dividend u/s 2(22)(e) - proof of incriminating material found in the course of search - There is no loan or advance received by the assessee from the company. It is seen that even as per the case of the A.O. made in the assessment order, the loan or advance has been received by the assessee from the partnership firm. Therefore, as per the admitted case of the A.O., such loan or advance having not been received by the assessee from a closely held company cannot be treated as dividend u/s 2(22)(e), since the first ingredient of section 2(22)(e) itself is not met in this case. - AT
Addition of deemed dividend u/s 2(22)(e) - proof of incriminating material found in the course of search - There is no loan or advance received by the assessee from the company. It is seen that even as per the case of the A.O. made in the assessment order, the loan or advance has been received by the assessee from the partnership firm. Therefore, as per the admitted case of the A.O., such loan or advance having not been received by the assessee from a closely held company cannot be treated as dividend u/s 2(22)(e), since the first ingredient of section 2(22)(e) itself is not met in this case. - AT
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.
TaxTMI 
of 4801
Join Channel
TaxTMI 
