Transaction value rejection requires reliable corroboration; refundable VAT is excluded and temporary registration does not defeat new-vehicle exempti...
Appellate jurisdiction remains available where a wrist-worn gold ornament cannot conclusively be characterised as imported baggage at the preliminary ...
Written complaint requirement bars cognizance on police reports for securities offences, while unsupported breach of trust and cheating allegations fa...
Risk-based postal import clearance standardises electronic assessment, document requests, duty realisation and delivery controls at Foreign Post Offic...
Customs Cargo Service Provider appointment extends custodianship to additional terminal land, subject to cargo-control, security and licence condition...
Excess cash and stock found during survey proceedings were treated as income from undisclosed sources, liable for taxation u/s 115BBE. The Assessing Officer (AO) ordered taxation but failed to compute tax per Section 115BBE, rendering the order prejudicial to revenue interests. Regarding excess stock, the assessee's justification was rejected, and the unexplained portion was added to income. However, the AO consciously did not apply Section 115BBE, taking a plausible view that the income emerged from business. The Tribunal considered the AO's order prejudicial for not charging tax u/s 115BBE on the disclosed income but found no issue with the treatment of excess stock income as business income, as the AO applied their mind. The assessee's ground was partly allowed.
Excess cash and stock found during survey proceedings were treated as income from undisclosed sources, liable for taxation u/s 115BBE. The Assessing Officer (AO) ordered taxation but failed to compute tax per Section 115BBE, rendering the order prejudicial to revenue interests. Regarding excess stock, the assessee's justification was rejected, and the unexplained portion was added to income. However, the AO consciously did not apply Section 115BBE, taking a plausible view that the income emerged from business. The Tribunal considered the AO's order prejudicial for not charging tax u/s 115BBE on the disclosed income but found no issue with the treatment of excess stock income as business income, as the AO applied their mind. The assessee's ground was partly allowed.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.
TaxTMI 
of 4792
Join Channel
TaxTMI 
