Business expenditure deduction requires proof of genuine commission payments and commercial allowability; turnover growth alone cannot validate the cl...
Article 8 treaty coverage excluded third-party airline support services, while documented demonetisation cash receipts remained accepted business inco...
Functional comparability under TNMM requires highway contract benchmarks to reflect operation, maintenance and transfer activities, requiring fresh be...
The ITAT Bangalore addressed unexplained cash deposits u/s 69A, focusing on the credibility of earlier withdrawals as a source for redeposits. The Tribunal examined fund flow and cash flow statements, presuming cash availability for redeposit. The assessee deposited sums during demonetization, providing bank account details, rent agreements, and rental income confirmation. The assessee explained using earlier withdrawals and tenant payments for redeposits, supported by the case of S.R. Venkataratnam. The Tribunal ruled in favor of the assessee, allowing credit for cash withdrawals and rental income towards bank deposits, deleting the addition for unexplained cash deposits during demonetization.
The ITAT Bangalore addressed unexplained cash deposits u/s 69A, focusing on the credibility of earlier withdrawals as a source for redeposits. The Tribunal examined fund flow and cash flow statements, presuming cash availability for redeposit. The assessee deposited sums during demonetization, providing bank account details, rent agreements, and rental income confirmation. The assessee explained using earlier withdrawals and tenant payments for redeposits, supported by the case of S.R. Venkataratnam. The Tribunal ruled in favor of the assessee, allowing credit for cash withdrawals and rental income towards bank deposits, deleting the addition for unexplained cash deposits during demonetization.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.
TaxTMI 
of 4803
Join Channel
TaxTMI 
