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...
The case pertains to an addition made u/s 69 for unexplained investment in agricultural land at Ratlam. The issue revolved around whether the addition was based on presumption or evidence. The Tribunal held that the registered sale deed and bank statements showing payment through post-dated cheques cannot be disregarded. The authorities' apprehension that cash must have exchanged hands is merely a presumption without any evidence. The Tribunal emphasized that presumption, no matter how strong, can never substitute evidence. When documentary evidence in the form of a registered deed and bank statements exist, mere presumption should not prevail. The Tribunal allowed the assessee's appeal, giving credence to the documentary evidence over presumption.
The case pertains to an addition made u/s 69 for unexplained investment in agricultural land at Ratlam. The issue revolved around whether the addition was based on presumption or evidence. The Tribunal held that the registered sale deed and bank statements showing payment through post-dated cheques cannot be disregarded. The authorities' apprehension that cash must have exchanged hands is merely a presumption without any evidence. The Tribunal emphasized that presumption, no matter how strong, can never substitute evidence. When documentary evidence in the form of a registered deed and bank statements exist, mere presumption should not prevail. The Tribunal allowed the assessee's appeal, giving credence to the documentary evidence over presumption.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.