Fraud-based GST assessment cannot stand without allegations of fraud, wilful misstatement or suppression; proceedings must follow normal classificatio...
Page of 4805
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
1341 to 1360 of 96092 Results
❮
❯
❯❯
0 / 200
Expand Note
Add to Folder
No Folders have been created
+
Are you sure you want to delete "My most important" ?
The Appellate Tribunal considered the issue of condonation of delay in filing appeals, which exceeded 400 days, due to unexplained cash deposits and protective additions made in the hands of the assessee. The assessee believed the protective addition would be deleted after the substantive addition was removed by the tribunal. The delay was attributed to bonafide reasons, as the assessee acted on advice and filed a rectification application, showing no malafide intention. The Tribunal held that the income from unexplained cash deposits should be assessed in the hands of the society, not the individual, and deleted the protective additions made in the assessee's hands.
The Appellate Tribunal considered the issue of condonation of delay in filing appeals, which exceeded 400 days, due to unexplained cash deposits and protective additions made in the hands of the assessee. The assessee believed the protective addition would be deleted after the substantive addition was removed by the tribunal. The delay was attributed to bonafide reasons, as the assessee acted on advice and filed a rectification application, showing no malafide intention. The Tribunal held that the income from unexplained cash deposits should be assessed in the hands of the society, not the individual, and deleted the protective additions made in the assessee's hands.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.
TaxTMI 
of 4805
Join Channel
TaxTMI 
