Transaction value rejection requires reliable corroboration; refundable VAT is excluded and temporary registration does not defeat new-vehicle exempti...
Appellate jurisdiction remains available where a wrist-worn gold ornament cannot conclusively be characterised as imported baggage at the preliminary ...
Written complaint requirement bars cognizance on police reports for securities offences, while unsupported breach of trust and cheating allegations fa...
Risk-based postal import clearance standardises electronic assessment, document requests, duty realisation and delivery controls at Foreign Post Offic...
Page of 4786
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
61 to 80 of 95715 Results
❮
❯
❯❯
0 / 200
Expand Note
Add to Folder
No Folders have been created
+
Are you sure you want to delete "My most important" ?
This is a summary of an order from the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal (ITAT) dealing with various additions and disallowances made by the Assessing Officer (AO) and Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) [CIT(A)]. The key points are: Increase in share capital and unsecured loans were treated as unexplained cash credits u/s 68, but the CIT(A) deleted the additions after the assessee furnished satisfactory explanations during remand proceedings. The ITAT upheld the CIT(A)'s decision. Interest expenditure disallowance was also deleted by the CIT(A), which the ITAT did not interfere with. The ITAT directed the AO to allow service charges, valuation charges, installation charges, and computer service charges as they were payments made through banking channels to organized sector vendors, fulfilling Section 37(1) requirements. Additions relating to investments were deleted by the CIT(A) based on the AO's remand report accepting the assessee's explanation supported by evidence. The ITAT did not interfere. Professional fees paid to a Chartered Accountant at 3% of the loan amount were accepted by the AO after TDS deduction. The CIT(A) restricted it to 1%, but the ITAT allowed the full 3% claim.
This is a summary of an order from the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal (ITAT) dealing with various additions and disallowances made by the Assessing Officer (AO) and Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) [CIT(A)]. The key points are: Increase in share capital and unsecured loans were treated as unexplained cash credits u/s 68, but the CIT(A) deleted the additions after the assessee furnished satisfactory explanations during remand proceedings. The ITAT upheld the CIT(A)'s decision. Interest expenditure disallowance was also deleted by the CIT(A), which the ITAT did not interfere with. The ITAT directed the AO to allow service charges, valuation charges, installation charges, and computer service charges as they were payments made through banking channels to organized sector vendors, fulfilling Section 37(1) requirements. Additions relating to investments were deleted by the CIT(A) based on the AO's remand report accepting the assessee's explanation supported by evidence. The ITAT did not interfere. Professional fees paid to a Chartered Accountant at 3% of the loan amount were accepted by the AO after TDS deduction. The CIT(A) restricted it to 1%, but the ITAT allowed the full 3% claim.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.