Charitable trust registration requires a specified-violation notice; settled cash deposits and related-party payments did not justify cancellation or ...
External development charges trigger TDS under section 194C, while disputed administrative payments require factual verification and fresh adjudicatio...
Section 270AA penalty immunity requires identified statutory defaults and a hearing before rejection; reassessment disclosure may constitute under-rep...
Section 80JJAA employee-cost deduction allowed for deployed staff but barred against transfer-pricing income enhancement, with pricing issues remanded...
Transfer-pricing methodology protects commercially genuine associated-enterprise payments, while pre-2016 secondary adjustments and related notional i...
Negative liens over operating assets can constitute international transactions requiring arm's-length pricing reflecting restricted borrowing and expa...
Cross-examination rights in Customs Broker revocation inquiries require witness examination; procedural denial may be cured through fresh adjudication...
Disallowance of losses suffered by the appellant on genuine share trading and direct expenses incurred. The key points are: The reasoning given by the Assessing Officer (AO) in the Assessment Order is based on doubts and suspicion rather than facts. A bona fide business arrangement between sister concerns with a signed agreement, not treated as bogus by authorities, cannot be considered a bogus transaction. Losses incurred have been assessed, but the part recovered from the assessee has been added, despite transactions being recorded in audited books. This view of AO/CIT(A) is unsound and additions are deleted. Disallowance of various expenses is rejected as the share trading business was wrongly held bogus. Addition on account of income from house property is upheld as per Section 23, since the property was held for sale and not occupied for residence. No interference with CIT(A)'s order on this issue.
Disallowance of losses suffered by the appellant on genuine share trading and direct expenses incurred. The key points are: The reasoning given by the Assessing Officer (AO) in the Assessment Order is based on doubts and suspicion rather than facts. A bona fide business arrangement between sister concerns with a signed agreement, not treated as bogus by authorities, cannot be considered a bogus transaction. Losses incurred have been assessed, but the part recovered from the assessee has been added, despite transactions being recorded in audited books. This view of AO/CIT(A) is unsound and additions are deleted. Disallowance of various expenses is rejected as the share trading business was wrongly held bogus. Addition on account of income from house property is upheld as per Section 23, since the property was held for sale and not occupied for residence. No interference with CIT(A)'s order on this issue.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.
TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
of 4828 
Join Channel 
