Independent show-cause notices remain separate proceedings, while customs adjudication challenges should ordinarily follow the statutory appellate rem...
Institutional incapacity in customs settlement proceedings excludes non-functional quorum periods from statutory disposal timelines, preventing automa...
Interactive touchscreen panels with integrated computing functions fall under automatic data-processing machines rather than display monitors for cust...
Ex parte injunction service requirements were substantially met, while civil recovery and SFIO investigation into provident fund defalcation continued...
Enforcement of resolution-plan directions continues without a Supreme Court stay, preventing suspension of redistribution and escrowed-fund distributi...
Third-party ownership claims over attached property require Special Court adjudication where purchasers lack registered sale deeds and bona fides rema...
Pure-agent reimbursements in clearing and forwarding services are excluded from taxable value when qualifying third-party payments are properly record...
The ITAT Surat ruled on unexplained cash credit u/s 68, finding the assessee proved identity, creditworthiness, and genuineness of unsecured loan receipts. Repayment evidence via banking channels was accepted. Legal precedents like CIT Vs Ayachi Chandrashekhar Narsangji were cited to support no addition when loans were repaid in subsequent years. Cases like ACIT Vs Naresh Nemchand Shah and Rajhans Construction (P) Ltd. were referenced for similar views. The decision in CIT Vs. Amber Tradecorp (P) ltd. emphasized no addition u/s 68 if loans were repaid. Precedents like Rohini Builders and USHA STUD AGRICULTURAL FARM LTD. were cited to support the assessee's position. The addition of unsecured loans was disallowed, and the appeal by the assessee was allowed.
The ITAT Surat ruled on unexplained cash credit u/s 68, finding the assessee proved identity, creditworthiness, and genuineness of unsecured loan receipts. Repayment evidence via banking channels was accepted. Legal precedents like CIT Vs Ayachi Chandrashekhar Narsangji were cited to support no addition when loans were repaid in subsequent years. Cases like ACIT Vs Naresh Nemchand Shah and Rajhans Construction (P) Ltd. were referenced for similar views. The decision in CIT Vs. Amber Tradecorp (P) ltd. emphasized no addition u/s 68 if loans were repaid. Precedents like Rohini Builders and USHA STUD AGRICULTURAL FARM LTD. were cited to support the assessee's position. The addition of unsecured loans was disallowed, and the appeal by the assessee was allowed.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.