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 Visakhapatnam addressed an addition u/s 69A for unexplained cash deposits in the bank account. The assessee failed to explain the sources for cash deposits, leading to scrutiny under CASS. The tribunal found that deposits made before demonetisation were included beyond the limited scrutiny scope. Cash deposits during demonetisation were claimed as gifts from parents. Partial relief was granted based on CBDT Instruction No.03/2017, allowing relief for deposits up to specified limits without further verification. Further relief of Rs. 5,00,000 was granted for pre-demonetisation deposits, while the remaining addition was upheld due to lack of evidence on transactions during demonetisation. The tribunal partly allowed the assessee's grounds.
The ITAT Visakhapatnam addressed an addition u/s 69A for unexplained cash deposits in the bank account. The assessee failed to explain the sources for cash deposits, leading to scrutiny under CASS. The tribunal found that deposits made before demonetisation were included beyond the limited scrutiny scope. Cash deposits during demonetisation were claimed as gifts from parents. Partial relief was granted based on CBDT Instruction No.03/2017, allowing relief for deposits up to specified limits without further verification. Further relief of Rs. 5,00,000 was granted for pre-demonetisation deposits, while the remaining addition was upheld due to lack of evidence on transactions during demonetisation. The tribunal partly allowed the assessee's grounds.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.