Charitable trust registration requires a specified-violation notice; settled cash deposits and related-party payments did not justify cancellation or ...
External development charges trigger TDS under section 194C, while disputed administrative payments require factual verification and fresh adjudicatio...
Section 270AA penalty immunity requires identified statutory defaults and a hearing before rejection; reassessment disclosure may constitute under-rep...
Section 80JJAA employee-cost deduction allowed for deployed staff but barred against transfer-pricing income enhancement, with pricing issues remanded...
Transfer-pricing methodology protects commercially genuine associated-enterprise payments, while pre-2016 secondary adjustments and related notional i...
Negative liens over operating assets can constitute international transactions requiring arm's-length pricing reflecting restricted borrowing and expa...
Cross-examination rights in Customs Broker revocation inquiries require witness examination; procedural denial may be cured through fresh adjudication...
The case concerns the reopening of assessment u/s 147 based on information from the Non-filers Monitoring System (NMS) about cash deposits in the assessee's bank account. The Assessing Officer made an addition of unexplained money u/s 69A, partially accepting the assessee's explanation for the cash deposits but rejecting others due to lack of documentary evidence. The Tribunal found that the assessee was deprived of a fair chance to present their case due to procedural deficiencies and reliance on email communication inaccessible to the assessee. The order of the Additional Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) was set aside, and the matter was remanded back for fresh adjudication after providing adequate opportunity to the assessee to present their case, in accordance with the principles of natural justice.
The case concerns the reopening of assessment u/s 147 based on information from the Non-filers Monitoring System (NMS) about cash deposits in the assessee's bank account. The Assessing Officer made an addition of unexplained money u/s 69A, partially accepting the assessee's explanation for the cash deposits but rejecting others due to lack of documentary evidence. The Tribunal found that the assessee was deprived of a fair chance to present their case due to procedural deficiencies and reliance on email communication inaccessible to the assessee. The order of the Additional Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) was set aside, and the matter was remanded back for fresh adjudication after providing adequate opportunity to the assessee to present their case, in accordance with the principles of natural justice.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.