Specialized Investment Fund distribution now requires dedicated certification, while transitional recognition preserves existing qualified distributor...
Overlapping GST proceedings require Central and State authorities to designate one competent authority for coordinated adjudication of the same matter...
Composite healthcare supplies retain exemption when patient care is the contract's essential character, despite payment through an implementing agency...
Unexplained creditor u/s. 68 - onus to prove - The ITAT ruled that once the identity of the creditor and the genuineness of the transaction are established, proving the creditor's capacity is not mandatory for the assessee. This is supported by the precedent set in "Labh Chand Bohra Vs. ITO" by the Rajasthan High Court, aligning with the doctrine that the onus shifts away from the assessee once the initial proof of transaction is provided.
Unexplained creditor u/s. 68 - onus to prove - The ITAT ruled that once the identity of the creditor and the genuineness of the transaction are established, proving the creditor's capacity is not mandatory for the assessee. This is supported by the precedent set in "Labh Chand Bohra Vs. ITO" by the Rajasthan High Court, aligning with the doctrine that the onus shifts away from the assessee once the initial proof of transaction is provided.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.