Political contribution deductions require genuine transactions; banking records and party registration alone cannot defeat evidence of accommodation e...
Post-death GST liability permits fresh proceedings against legal representatives, while discontinued-business recovery remains limited to the inherite...
Non-confirmation of FEMA seizure prevents adjudicators from overriding pending appellate findings on recorded reasons and suspected foreign asset hold...
Ex-parte assessment u/s 144 treated unexplained cash deposits as undisclosed and unexplained income, added to the assessee's total income u/s 68 read with Section 69A. Where sums are credited in the assessee's books, the same may be charged as income if the assessee's explanation is unsatisfactory, creating prima facie evidence against the assessee. The burden is on the assessee to rebut the presumption of income receipt. In this case, despite notices, the assessee did not appear or furnish explanations before the authorities. The belated explanation of amounts collected as a recovery agent was found unreasonable. The AO, CIT(Appeals), NFAC, and ITAT concurrently concluded that the assessee failed to rebut the presumption u/s 68 read with Section 69A. Following the Supreme Court's decision in Vijay Kumar Talwar, the ITAT's finding based on records is correct, and no substantial question of law arises. The appeal is dismissed at the admission stage without notice to the other side.
Ex-parte assessment u/s 144 treated unexplained cash deposits as undisclosed and unexplained income, added to the assessee's total income u/s 68 read with Section 69A. Where sums are credited in the assessee's books, the same may be charged as income if the assessee's explanation is unsatisfactory, creating prima facie evidence against the assessee. The burden is on the assessee to rebut the presumption of income receipt. In this case, despite notices, the assessee did not appear or furnish explanations before the authorities. The belated explanation of amounts collected as a recovery agent was found unreasonable. The AO, CIT(Appeals), NFAC, and ITAT concurrently concluded that the assessee failed to rebut the presumption u/s 68 read with Section 69A. Following the Supreme Court's decision in Vijay Kumar Talwar, the ITAT's finding based on records is correct, and no substantial question of law arises. The appeal is dismissed at the admission stage without notice to the other side.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.
TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
