Authentication of paper assessment orders upheld, while qualifying repairs, consumables and vendor advance write-offs remain deductible business claim...
Transaction value cannot be rejected solely on non-statutory valuation guidelines without corroborative evidence supporting reassessment of final cust...
Cross-examination rights and corroborated evidence limit customs penalties for misdeclaration in genuine import transactions involving documented clea...
Tariff classification of vehicle gear components follows the specific gearing entry, displacing motor-vehicle parts classification and related liabili...
Necessary-party requirements limit impleadment of independent entities, while deferred consideration does not create an appealable adverse determinati...
The ITAT Jodhpur allowed admission of additional evidence u/r 46A of IT Rules by CIT(A) to delete addition on merits. The tribunal found merit in the evidence provided by the assessee regarding sales of bullion, criticizing the AO for not seeking further details. The revenue's objection to non-admission of evidence due to lack of documentation was dismissed. The CIT(A) rightly admitted additional evidence, rejecting the department's objection. Regarding unexplained cash deposits u/s 69A, the appellant explained deposits as sale proceeds from bullion trading, earning a 1% commission. The tribunal upheld CIT(A)'s decision to apply a net profit rate of 1% on total deposits, considering the nature of the business and standard accounting principles. CIT(A) applied a net profit rate of 1.2% to cover possible revenue leakages, which was deemed fair and reasonable. The tribunal upheld the application of the 1.2% NP rate for estimating commission earned on bullion sales.
The ITAT Jodhpur allowed admission of additional evidence u/r 46A of IT Rules by CIT(A) to delete addition on merits. The tribunal found merit in the evidence provided by the assessee regarding sales of bullion, criticizing the AO for not seeking further details. The revenue's objection to non-admission of evidence due to lack of documentation was dismissed. The CIT(A) rightly admitted additional evidence, rejecting the department's objection. Regarding unexplained cash deposits u/s 69A, the appellant explained deposits as sale proceeds from bullion trading, earning a 1% commission. The tribunal upheld CIT(A)'s decision to apply a net profit rate of 1% on total deposits, considering the nature of the business and standard accounting principles. CIT(A) applied a net profit rate of 1.2% to cover possible revenue leakages, which was deemed fair and reasonable. The tribunal upheld the application of the 1.2% NP rate for estimating commission earned on bullion sales.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.
TaxTMI 
of 4803
Join Channel
TaxTMI 
