Credit-note turnover adjustments preserve inverted-duty refunds, while ministerial re-computation does not constitute an impermissible appellate reman...
Revisional jurisdiction over export quota premium deductions requires both error and Revenue prejudice; a permissible assessment view cannot be displa...
The Appellate Tribunal held that the addition of Rs. 51.20 lacs as unexplained investment u/ss 69 or 56(2)(x)/6(2)(vii) was unjustified as there was no evidence of actual payment to vendors. Section 69 requires actual investment, not just stamp value. The lower authorities erred in making the addition, which is not taxable for a partnership firm u/s 56(2)(x) for the relevant assessment year. The decision favored the assessee, and the appeal was allowed.
The Appellate Tribunal held that the addition of Rs. 51.20 lacs as unexplained investment u/ss 69 or 56(2)(x)/6(2)(vii) was unjustified as there was no evidence of actual payment to vendors. Section 69 requires actual investment, not just stamp value. The lower authorities erred in making the addition, which is not taxable for a partnership firm u/s 56(2)(x) for the relevant assessment year. The decision favored the assessee, and the appeal was allowed.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.
TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
