Building-plan sanction charges require statutory authority; unauthorised fees and GST were quashed, while labour cess must follow prescribed collectio...
Pure-agent exclusion fails where hotel booking facilitators receive third-party services themselves, making entire customer consideration taxable as r...
Transfer pricing requires evidence for AMP transactions, functionally reliable comparables, and appropriate aggregation or Berry Ratio benchmarking me...
Revisionary jurisdiction cannot reopen share capital assessments where adequate inquiry supports a permissible view and no independent error is establ...
Reassessment jurisdiction fails where unverified portal information is aggregated without examining the taxpayer's explanation or relevance of entries...
Statutory sanction for delayed reassessment requires approval from the prescribed authority; approval by an inferior authority invalidates jurisdictio...
Transfer pricing margin adjustments require matching treatment of non-operating income and related costs, with comparability issues reconsidered on ev...
Page of 4803
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
181 to 200 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" ?
Estimation of income - bogus purchases - The Tribunal considered the facts surrounding the alleged bogus purchases. Despite the inability of the assessee to establish the identity of the parties and the genuineness of the transactions, the Tribunal deliberated on whether the Assessing Officer was justified in adding the entire amount of bogus purchases or only the profit margin. Referring to a precedent set by the Hon’ble Gujarat High Court, the Tribunal concluded that once it is determined that the amount represents alleged bogus purchases from bogus suppliers, it is not necessary to restrict the disallowance. Thus, the Tribunal upheld the addition of 100% of the alleged bogus purchases.
Estimation of income - bogus purchases - The Tribunal considered the facts surrounding the alleged bogus purchases. Despite the inability of the assessee to establish the identity of the parties and the genuineness of the transactions, the Tribunal deliberated on whether the Assessing Officer was justified in adding the entire amount of bogus purchases or only the profit margin. Referring to a precedent set by the Hon’ble Gujarat High Court, the Tribunal concluded that once it is determined that the amount represents alleged bogus purchases from bogus suppliers, it is not necessary to restrict the disallowance. Thus, the Tribunal upheld the addition of 100% of the alleged bogus purchases.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.