Institutional incapacity in customs settlement proceedings excludes non-functional quorum periods from statutory disposal timelines, preventing automa...
Interactive touchscreen panels with integrated computing functions fall under automatic data-processing machines rather than display monitors for cust...
Ex parte injunction service requirements were substantially met, while civil recovery and SFIO investigation into provident fund defalcation continued...
Enforcement of resolution-plan directions continues without a Supreme Court stay, preventing suspension of redistribution and escrowed-fund distributi...
Third-party ownership claims over attached property require Special Court adjudication where purchasers lack registered sale deeds and bona fides rema...
Pure-agent reimbursements in clearing and forwarding services are excluded from taxable value when qualifying third-party payments are properly record...
Customs relief for Strait of Hormuz maritime disruptions remains available, with existing conditions continuing unchanged through the extended validit...
Jurisdictional issue regarding notice u/s 143(2) was addressed, with ITAT holding that the initial notice by ACIT, Circle-5(1), Delhi was within time, and subsequent transfer to jurisdictional AO did not invalidate proceedings. Regarding addition u/ss 68/69C, ITAT held CIT(A) erred in making addition u/s 69C without issuing show cause notice as mandated u/s 251. Books of account were accepted by AO, who did not reject them or make efforts to verify sundry creditors. Additions u/s 68 cannot be made when sales, purchases, and gross profit were disclosed and accepted. CIT(A)'s addition u/s 69C on grounds of non-banking channel purchases was incorrect when sales were accepted and gross profit rate increased. ITAT deleted CIT(A)'s addition u/s 69C, allowing assessee's appeal.
Jurisdictional issue regarding notice u/s 143(2) was addressed, with ITAT holding that the initial notice by ACIT, Circle-5(1), Delhi was within time, and subsequent transfer to jurisdictional AO did not invalidate proceedings. Regarding addition u/ss 68/69C, ITAT held CIT(A) erred in making addition u/s 69C without issuing show cause notice as mandated u/s 251. Books of account were accepted by AO, who did not reject them or make efforts to verify sundry creditors. Additions u/s 68 cannot be made when sales, purchases, and gross profit were disclosed and accepted. CIT(A)'s addition u/s 69C on grounds of non-banking channel purchases was incorrect when sales were accepted and gross profit rate increased. ITAT deleted CIT(A)'s addition u/s 69C, allowing assessee's appeal.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.
TaxTMI 
of 4805
Join Channel
TaxTMI 
