Concessional corporate tax option under section 115BAA survives procedural documentary lapses when statutory compliance and earlier exercise are estab...
Penny-stock additions require transaction-specific evidence; general investigation material alone cannot establish undisclosed income or accommodation...
Transfer pricing comparability prioritises reliable external CUPs and foreign-currency LIBOR benchmarks for exports, borrowings and delayed receivable...
Section 153C satisfaction and seized electronic records sustained unexplained-investment addition, subject to proportionate ownership-share verificati...
The assessment reopening u/s 147 read with Section 148 was found to be unsustainable due to the lack of independent application of mind by the Commissioner of Income Tax (CIT) in granting approval. The CIT's approval was given in a slipshod manner without recording their own satisfaction, rendering the subsequent notice u/s 148 and assessment proceedings invalid. The addition made u/s 69 was also found to be improper as the Assessing Officer (AO) failed to invoke or apply any specific provision of law while making the addition. The AO did not specify the head under which the addition was made, whether business income, capital gains, or u/ss 48, 56, 68, or 69. Making an addition without invoking the relevant provision of the Act is against the law and liable to be deleted. The reasons for the addition cannot be supplemented by the assessment order or affidavit, and the assessee must be notified of the exact contravention or provision under which the assessment or additions are sought. Consequently, the addition sustained by the lower authorities deserves to be deleted, and the appeal allowed on merits.
The assessment reopening u/s 147 read with Section 148 was found to be unsustainable due to the lack of independent application of mind by the Commissioner of Income Tax (CIT) in granting approval. The CIT's approval was given in a slipshod manner without recording their own satisfaction, rendering the subsequent notice u/s 148 and assessment proceedings invalid. The addition made u/s 69 was also found to be improper as the Assessing Officer (AO) failed to invoke or apply any specific provision of law while making the addition. The AO did not specify the head under which the addition was made, whether business income, capital gains, or u/ss 48, 56, 68, or 69. Making an addition without invoking the relevant provision of the Act is against the law and liable to be deleted. The reasons for the addition cannot be supplemented by the assessment order or affidavit, and the assessee must be notified of the exact contravention or provision under which the assessment or additions are sought. Consequently, the addition sustained by the lower authorities deserves to be deleted, and the appeal allowed on merits.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.