Corporate guarantee valuation permits actual ascertainable commission while barring retroactive application and extended-period penalties for bona fid...
Proper-officer jurisdiction under UPGST penalty provisions upheld; participation on merits prevents bypassing the statutory appellate remedy through w...
Transitioned CENVAT credit may validly satisfy mandatory pre-deposit requirements for legacy service tax appeals through Electronic Credit Ledger debi...
Building-plan sanction charges require statutory authority; unauthorised fees and GST were quashed, while labour cess must follow prescribed collectio...
Pure-agent exclusion fails where hotel booking facilitators receive third-party services themselves, making entire customer consideration taxable as r...
Transfer pricing requires evidence for AMP transactions, functionally reliable comparables, and appropriate aggregation or Berry Ratio benchmarking me...
Revisionary jurisdiction cannot reopen share capital assessments where adequate inquiry supports a permissible view and no independent error is establ...
Page of 4805
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
221 to 240 of 96092 Results
❮
❯
❯❯
0 / 200
Expand Note
Add to Folder
No Folders have been created
+
Are you sure you want to delete "My most important" ?
Assessment u/s 153A - Addition u/s 69A by the Assessing Officer on account of difference in amount credited in bank and sale proceeds shown in the income tax return. It is settled law that no addition can be made u/s 153A other than based on incriminating documents found during the search. Since no incriminating material was found during the search nor brought on record by the Assessing Officer, the issue is covered by the Supreme Court judgment in Abhisar Buildwell (P.) Ltd, and the addition made by the Assessing Officer is deleted in the absence of any incriminating material found during the course of search u/s 132. Validity of the assessment order passed by the Assessing Officer u/s 153A - Addition made u/s 69A on account of difference in returned income and income as per certificate issued. Section 153C is not invoked, and the assessment is framed u/s 153A. During the assessment u/s 153A, only the incriminating material found during the search of the assessee can be utilized, not the material found in the search of any other person. Therefore, the assessment proceedings must be initiated u/s 153C after satisfaction that the material found and seized during the search pertains to the appellant. The assessment order passed u/s 153A by the Assessing Officer is without jurisdiction and is quashed.
Assessment u/s 153A - Addition u/s 69A by the Assessing Officer on account of difference in amount credited in bank and sale proceeds shown in the income tax return. It is settled law that no addition can be made u/s 153A other than based on incriminating documents found during the search. Since no incriminating material was found during the search nor brought on record by the Assessing Officer, the issue is covered by the Supreme Court judgment in Abhisar Buildwell (P.) Ltd, and the addition made by the Assessing Officer is deleted in the absence of any incriminating material found during the course of search u/s 132. Validity of the assessment order passed by the Assessing Officer u/s 153A - Addition made u/s 69A on account of difference in returned income and income as per certificate issued. Section 153C is not invoked, and the assessment is framed u/s 153A. During the assessment u/s 153A, only the incriminating material found during the search of the assessee can be utilized, not the material found in the search of any other person. Therefore, the assessment proceedings must be initiated u/s 153C after satisfaction that the material found and seized during the search pertains to the appellant. The assessment order passed u/s 153A by the Assessing Officer is without jurisdiction and is quashed.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.