Form 26AS evidence requires successor-entity accounting verification after business transfer, while invoice-supported related-party advertising expend...
Money-laundering judgment timing requires awaiting the scheduled-offence decision despite continuation of the underlying trial where outcomes directly...
Accredited investor eligibility expands through securities-market exposure, while alternative investment fund disputes require prescribed resolution a...
Page of 4916
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
41 to 60 of 98302 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 held that the case was selected for "limited scrutiny" based on large cash deposits and property transfers. The addition u/s 56(2)(vii)(b) for the difference between Fair Market Value and actual consideration was not justified. The addition did not relate to the basis for limited scrutiny. The Tribunal cited M/s. Suraj Diamond Dealers Pvt. Ltd., stating that the AO can only go beyond limited scrutiny reasons with approval. The AO's addition was deemed erroneous as it was not part of the limited scrutiny reasons, thus the appeal grounds were allowed.
The Appellate Tribunal held that the case was selected for "limited scrutiny" based on large cash deposits and property transfers. The addition u/s 56(2)(vii)(b) for the difference between Fair Market Value and actual consideration was not justified. The addition did not relate to the basis for limited scrutiny. The Tribunal cited M/s. Suraj Diamond Dealers Pvt. Ltd., stating that the AO can only go beyond limited scrutiny reasons with approval. The AO's addition was deemed erroneous as it was not part of the limited scrutiny reasons, thus the appeal grounds were allowed.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.