Political contribution deductions require genuine transactions; banking records and party registration alone cannot defeat evidence of accommodation e...
Post-death GST liability permits fresh proceedings against legal representatives, while discontinued-business recovery remains limited to the inherite...
Non-confirmation of FEMA seizure prevents adjudicators from overriding pending appellate findings on recorded reasons and suspected foreign asset hold...
Reopening of assessment u/s 147 justified due to tangible material available with Assessing Officer (AO) to form reasonable belief regarding escapement of income. Brokerage income shown in firm's profit and loss account belonged to petitioner company as confirmed by partner/director's statement recorded during survey. Firm claimed bad debts to offset brokerage income credited in its books to avoid tax liability for petitioner company which performed work. AO rightly relied on Supreme Court decision in ITO v. Atchaiah, as right person (firm) required to be taxed for income from work done for foreign company. Petitioner's contention of regularly showing brokerage income in firm's books is subject to AO's scrutiny during assessment proceedings. Based on facts, income prima facie escaped assessment in petitioner company's case, justifying reopening. In petitioner firm's case, no scrutiny assessment earlier, issues raised by AO prima facie justify reopening. Reliance placed by petitioner on assuming jurisdiction for reopening not applicable, particularly when partner's statement confirms brokerage income belongs to petitioner company. Statement's evidentiary value to be considered during assessment after hearing petitioner. No interference warranted in reopening notice. Petition dismissed.
Reopening of assessment u/s 147 justified due to tangible material available with Assessing Officer (AO) to form reasonable belief regarding escapement of income. Brokerage income shown in firm's profit and loss account belonged to petitioner company as confirmed by partner/director's statement recorded during survey. Firm claimed bad debts to offset brokerage income credited in its books to avoid tax liability for petitioner company which performed work. AO rightly relied on Supreme Court decision in ITO v. Atchaiah, as right person (firm) required to be taxed for income from work done for foreign company. Petitioner's contention of regularly showing brokerage income in firm's books is subject to AO's scrutiny during assessment proceedings. Based on facts, income prima facie escaped assessment in petitioner company's case, justifying reopening. In petitioner firm's case, no scrutiny assessment earlier, issues raised by AO prima facie justify reopening. Reliance placed by petitioner on assuming jurisdiction for reopening not applicable, particularly when partner's statement confirms brokerage income belongs to petitioner company. Statement's evidentiary value to be considered during assessment after hearing petitioner. No interference warranted in reopening notice. Petition dismissed.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.
TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
