Independent show-cause notices remain separate proceedings, while customs adjudication challenges should ordinarily follow the statutory appellate rem...
Institutional incapacity in customs settlement proceedings excludes non-functional quorum periods from statutory disposal timelines, preventing automa...
Interactive touchscreen panels with integrated computing functions fall under automatic data-processing machines rather than display monitors for cust...
Ex parte injunction service requirements were substantially met, while civil recovery and SFIO investigation into provident fund defalcation continued...
Enforcement of resolution-plan directions continues without a Supreme Court stay, preventing suspension of redistribution and escrowed-fund distributi...
Third-party ownership claims over attached property require Special Court adjudication where purchasers lack registered sale deeds and bona fides rema...
Pure-agent reimbursements in clearing and forwarding services are excluded from taxable value when qualifying third-party payments are properly record...
Addition u/s 69A - cash loans given by the assessee as unexplained - decoding of the entries in the seized materials - The tribunal found that the assessing officer's reliance on statements recorded during the search was insufficient to justify the addition under section 69A. They emphasized that the assessing officer did not entertain the appellant's request for cross-examination, and the retracted statements raised doubts about their reliability. Additionally, the tribunal noted discrepancies in the interpretation of entries and the lack of concrete evidence connecting the appellant to the transactions. Therefore, they deemed the addition unjustified and deleted it.
Addition u/s 69A - cash loans given by the assessee as unexplained - decoding of the entries in the seized materials - The tribunal found that the assessing officer's reliance on statements recorded during the search was insufficient to justify the addition under section 69A. They emphasized that the assessing officer did not entertain the appellant's request for cross-examination, and the retracted statements raised doubts about their reliability. Additionally, the tribunal noted discrepancies in the interpretation of entries and the lack of concrete evidence connecting the appellant to the transactions. Therefore, they deemed the addition unjustified and deleted it.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.
TaxTMI 
of 4782
Join Channel
TaxTMI 
