Tax deduction compliance and payee income recognition govern consultancy disallowance, while no exempt income prevents related expenditure disallowanc...
Derivative abetment liability fails when correctly declared imported components establish no underlying improper importation by the principal importer...
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 
of 4784
Join Channel
TaxTMI 
