Arrest safeguards and transit remand requirements invalidated detention following inter-State transfer without communicated grounds or magistrate auth...
Arrest safeguards require disclosed grounds, relative intimation and transit remand, while duplicate prosecution under the CGST framework is unsustain...
Document Identification Number defects can invalidate GST assessments, with delayed challenges entertained conditionally where patent irregularities e...
Windmill commissioning evidence supported higher depreciation where grid connection and electricity generation proved operational use before the relev...
Pharmaceutical promotion and transfer-pricing comparability principles limited disallowances, while uncorroborated search allegations and unsupported ...
Business expenditure substantiation supports scrap credits, statutory payments and expense claims, while depreciation requires proof of actual busines...
The ITAT Kolkata held that the addition on a protective basis made by the Assessing Officer in the hands of the assessee, concerning a loan received from a director and relatives, was not sustainable. The LTCG earned by the loan creditors from share transactions in penny stock companies was the subject of substantive additions in the creditors' cases. Three creditors accepted the additions and paid taxes under Vivad Se Viswas Scheme, explaining the source of the loan as unaccounted income. The 4th creditor, also an Income Tax assessee, had the addition made in their case. As there was no allegation that the creditor's income/LTCG was linked to the assessee's unexplained income, and with the assessment of the other 3 creditors being time-barred without substantive additions, the source of the amount/LTCG was deemed admitted by the department in their hands. Consequently, the protective additions in the assessee's hands were deemed unsustainable, ruling in favor of the assessee.
The ITAT Kolkata held that the addition on a protective basis made by the Assessing Officer in the hands of the assessee, concerning a loan received from a director and relatives, was not sustainable. The LTCG earned by the loan creditors from share transactions in penny stock companies was the subject of substantive additions in the creditors' cases. Three creditors accepted the additions and paid taxes under Vivad Se Viswas Scheme, explaining the source of the loan as unaccounted income. The 4th creditor, also an Income Tax assessee, had the addition made in their case. As there was no allegation that the creditor's income/LTCG was linked to the assessee's unexplained income, and with the assessment of the other 3 creditors being time-barred without substantive additions, the source of the amount/LTCG was deemed admitted by the department in their hands. Consequently, the protective additions in the assessee's hands were deemed unsustainable, ruling in favor of the assessee.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.