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...
The Income Tax Appellate Tribunal held that the revised return of income filed by the assessee cannot be treated as invalid by the Assessing Officer (AO). Since the AO issued notice u/s 143(2) based on the revised return and completed the assessment considering the same, the revised return should be deemed valid. Consequently, no addition u/s 68 for the cash difference between the original and revised returns is warranted. Further, the Tribunal observed that the Department did not dispute the turnover admitted in the revised VAT returns, which reflected an increase in sales. The closing stock and cash on hand matched the cash deposits in the bank account. Therefore, the addition confirmed by the CIT(A) was unjustified.
The Income Tax Appellate Tribunal held that the revised return of income filed by the assessee cannot be treated as invalid by the Assessing Officer (AO). Since the AO issued notice u/s 143(2) based on the revised return and completed the assessment considering the same, the revised return should be deemed valid. Consequently, no addition u/s 68 for the cash difference between the original and revised returns is warranted. Further, the Tribunal observed that the Department did not dispute the turnover admitted in the revised VAT returns, which reflected an increase in sales. The closing stock and cash on hand matched the cash deposits in the bank account. Therefore, the addition confirmed by the CIT(A) was unjustified.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.
TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
of 4828 
Join Channel 
