Charitable trust registration requires a specified-violation notice; settled cash deposits and related-party payments did not justify cancellation or ...
External development charges trigger TDS under section 194C, while disputed administrative payments require factual verification and fresh adjudicatio...
Section 270AA penalty immunity requires identified statutory defaults and a hearing before rejection; reassessment disclosure may constitute under-rep...
Section 80JJAA employee-cost deduction allowed for deployed staff but barred against transfer-pricing income enhancement, with pricing issues remanded...
Transfer-pricing methodology protects commercially genuine associated-enterprise payments, while pre-2016 secondary adjustments and related notional i...
Negative liens over operating assets can constitute international transactions requiring arm's-length pricing reflecting restricted borrowing and expa...
Cross-examination rights in Customs Broker revocation inquiries require witness examination; procedural denial may be cured through fresh adjudication...
The Appellate Tribunal addressed the issue of addition u/s 68 for alleged bogus long-term capital gain. The Tribunal found that the Assessing Officer's reliance on a general investigation report and statements did not directly implicate the assessee or her broker in any wrongdoing. The Tribunal noted that the department did not link the assessee or her broker to entities identified by SEBI for price manipulation. The AO's reliance on the SEBI order and the suspension of trading in the scrip of M/s. Sunrise was deemed irrelevant. Citing a precedent, the Tribunal held that the transactions were genuine, and the assessee's claim for exemption u/s 10(38) was allowed. The decision favored the assessee.
The Appellate Tribunal addressed the issue of addition u/s 68 for alleged bogus long-term capital gain. The Tribunal found that the Assessing Officer's reliance on a general investigation report and statements did not directly implicate the assessee or her broker in any wrongdoing. The Tribunal noted that the department did not link the assessee or her broker to entities identified by SEBI for price manipulation. The AO's reliance on the SEBI order and the suspension of trading in the scrip of M/s. Sunrise was deemed irrelevant. Citing a precedent, the Tribunal held that the transactions were genuine, and the assessee's claim for exemption u/s 10(38) was allowed. The decision favored the assessee.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.
TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
of 4828 
Join Channel 
