Retention of seized property survives where recorded reasons support proceeds of crime, while stayed investigation periods are excluded from limitatio...
Specified income of Baddi Barotiwala Nalagarh Development Authority receives conditional tax exemption, retrospectively covering its designated assess...
Specified development authority income receives retrospective tax exemption, subject to non-commercial activity, unchanged income sources, and return-...
Unified Brand India framework introduces voluntary Trust Mark certification and funding support for export branding, packaging and global promotional ...
Origin Declaration authentication governs preferential tariff claims under India-UK CETA, requiring a validated reference number before import clearan...
Separate assessment orders for different years remain valid when distinct notices and hearing opportunities prevent prejudice from combined proceeding...
CIT(A) determined profit at 5.47% on total purchases. Assessee produced sufficient evidence regarding purchases, movement of goods, GST payment on transportation, expenses accounted for. No evidence of routing back payments. CIT(A) endorsed assessee's contentions but erred in directing gross profit rate application, defying logic. Assessee discharged onus, furnished abundant evidence substantiating purchases' genuineness. CIT(A) erred in sustaining gross profit addition on alleged purchases over declared profit. Gross profit determined by CIT(A) directed to be deleted. Addition u/s 56(2)(x) for difference between purchase price and stamp duty value of property purchased, without referring valuation to DVO, is unsustainable and liable to be deleted. AO bound to refer valuation to DVO when assessee disputes stamp duty value. Addition by AO and confirmation by CIT(A), without DVO reference, unsustainable and deleted in assessee's favor.
CIT(A) determined profit at 5.47% on total purchases. Assessee produced sufficient evidence regarding purchases, movement of goods, GST payment on transportation, expenses accounted for. No evidence of routing back payments. CIT(A) endorsed assessee's contentions but erred in directing gross profit rate application, defying logic. Assessee discharged onus, furnished abundant evidence substantiating purchases' genuineness. CIT(A) erred in sustaining gross profit addition on alleged purchases over declared profit. Gross profit determined by CIT(A) directed to be deleted. Addition u/s 56(2)(x) for difference between purchase price and stamp duty value of property purchased, without referring valuation to DVO, is unsustainable and liable to be deleted. AO bound to refer valuation to DVO when assessee disputes stamp duty value. Addition by AO and confirmation by CIT(A), without DVO reference, unsustainable and deleted in assessee's favor.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.
TaxTMI 
of 4801
Join Channel
TaxTMI 
