Opportunity to respond to jurisdictional reports is mandatory before customs settlement duty enhancement; connected applications require consistent ad...
Specific customs headings for scaffolding components prevail over general classification, invalidating misclassification proceedings and enabling with...
Liquidator appointment under Section 34 requires consideration of creditor recommendations, valid professional authorisation, and preservation of vali...
Income-tax exemption for specified regulatory fees and government grants applies subject to non-commercial activity and continuing compliance conditio...
Digital accessibility audit and remediation deadlines extended, while all other disability-compliance obligations for regulated entities remain unchan...
Page of 4803
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
621 to 640 of 96047 Results
❮
❯
❯❯
0 / 200
Expand Note
Add to Folder
No Folders have been created
+
Are you sure you want to delete "My most important" ?
Addition u/s 69 - addition based on the estimation of the cost of acquisition of the property - The ITAT observed that the AO had relied heavily on statements obtained during the survey proceedings, particularly regarding the payment of on-money for the property purchase. However, the Tribunal emphasized that such statements, which were later retracted, could not constitute valid evidence for making additions to the appellant's income. Furthermore, the Tribunal noted that the AO had not provided any supporting material apart from these statements to justify the addition. Considering these factors, the Tribunal held that the AO's decision to estimate the property acquisition cost at a higher value lacked sufficient basis and was not supported by credible evidence.
Addition u/s 69 - addition based on the estimation of the cost of acquisition of the property - The ITAT observed that the AO had relied heavily on statements obtained during the survey proceedings, particularly regarding the payment of on-money for the property purchase. However, the Tribunal emphasized that such statements, which were later retracted, could not constitute valid evidence for making additions to the appellant's income. Furthermore, the Tribunal noted that the AO had not provided any supporting material apart from these statements to justify the addition. Considering these factors, the Tribunal held that the AO's decision to estimate the property acquisition cost at a higher value lacked sufficient basis and was not supported by credible evidence.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.
TaxTMI 
of 4803
Join Channel
TaxTMI 
