Service of notice and contractual debt acknowledgment preserved insolvency admission against a corporate guarantor despite limitation and natural just...
Original works exemption excludes standalone boulder transportation, leaving subcontracted railway-project transport services subject to service tax l...
Annual production capacity determinations excluding stenter galleries support refunds for unconstitutional excise levies without an unjust-enrichment ...
Vicarious liability for cheque dishonour requires specific allegations of responsibility and cheque signatory; generic director allegations cannot sus...
IT Resilience Index requires market infrastructure institutions to automate resilience scoring, early warnings, and continuous service-delivery monito...
Distinction between Section 69 and Section 56(2) regarding unexplained investment and gift. Section 69 requires the Assessing Officer to establish that the assessee made investments not recorded in books, and the assessee's inability to explain the nature and source. In this case, the payment was made by another person, not the assessee, and the source was satisfactorily explained with evidence. Hence, Section 69 is inapplicable. Section 56(2) regarding taxability as gift was never discussed by authorities. Revenue cannot make a fresh case or improve the order. Documents confirming loan and repayment cannot be denied. Mere lack of repayment capacity does not make it a gift when parties confirm it as a loan secured by joint ownership. Addition u/s 69C for car purchase was rightly deleted as the source was admitted to be from another person's bank account, not the assessee's undisclosed expenditure. Revenue's appeal dismissed.
Distinction between Section 69 and Section 56(2) regarding unexplained investment and gift. Section 69 requires the Assessing Officer to establish that the assessee made investments not recorded in books, and the assessee's inability to explain the nature and source. In this case, the payment was made by another person, not the assessee, and the source was satisfactorily explained with evidence. Hence, Section 69 is inapplicable. Section 56(2) regarding taxability as gift was never discussed by authorities. Revenue cannot make a fresh case or improve the order. Documents confirming loan and repayment cannot be denied. Mere lack of repayment capacity does not make it a gift when parties confirm it as a loan secured by joint ownership. Addition u/s 69C for car purchase was rightly deleted as the source was admitted to be from another person's bank account, not the assessee's undisclosed expenditure. Revenue's appeal dismissed.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.
TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
of 4828 
Join Channel 
