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...
Defined public benefit can retain charitable character; registration renewal requires examining genuine activities and legal compliance, not surplus a...
Capital reduction is distinct from share buy-back, preventing buy-back tax; restructuring interest and related business deductions also survive scruti...
Page of 4792
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
981 to 1000 of 95833 Results
❮
❯
❯❯
0 / 200
Expand Note
Add to Folder
No Folders have been created
+
Are you sure you want to delete "My most important" ?
The assessee received Rs. 125 lacs in cash from SGCFCL for facilitation work, which was not recorded in the books. The assessee claimed the amount was paid to 2500 shareholders, but failed to provide evidence of such payments. The onus was on the assessee to prove the impugned payment did not constitute income, which the assessee failed to discharge. The assessment was based on incriminating material and the assessee's statement admitting receipt of cash payment. The Appellate Tribunal upheld the assessment, rejecting the assessee's arguments.
The assessee received Rs. 125 lacs in cash from SGCFCL for facilitation work, which was not recorded in the books. The assessee claimed the amount was paid to 2500 shareholders, but failed to provide evidence of such payments. The onus was on the assessee to prove the impugned payment did not constitute income, which the assessee failed to discharge. The assessment was based on incriminating material and the assessee's statement admitting receipt of cash payment. The Appellate Tribunal upheld the assessment, rejecting the assessee's arguments.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.
TaxTMI 
of 4792
Join Channel
TaxTMI 
