Blocked input tax credit for resort construction remains unavailable; interest follows actual utilisation, while delayed payment attracts statutory pe...
Duplicate PAN allocation requires record verification and deactivation reasons before assessment-related transactions can be attributed to an assessee...
Faceless assessment safeguards require requested personal hearings and adequate final show-cause response time, failing which reassessment is required...
The assessee, engaged in trading gold, silver, and diamond jewelry, witnessed a substantial increase in cash sales during October and the first week of November 2016 due to Dussehra and Diwali festivals. After demonetization on November 8, 2016, jewelers opened shutters and made substantial sales from 8:30 PM to 12:00 AM. The assessee filed purchase and sale registers, stock summary, returns, and explained the cash deposit, discharging the onus of proving genuineness. The Appellate Tribunal observed that the increase in cash sales was due to festival occasions, and people chose to purchase jewelry with cash. Consequently, the addition u/s 69A was unjustified, and the decision favored the assessee.
The assessee, engaged in trading gold, silver, and diamond jewelry, witnessed a substantial increase in cash sales during October and the first week of November 2016 due to Dussehra and Diwali festivals. After demonetization on November 8, 2016, jewelers opened shutters and made substantial sales from 8:30 PM to 12:00 AM. The assessee filed purchase and sale registers, stock summary, returns, and explained the cash deposit, discharging the onus of proving genuineness. The Appellate Tribunal observed that the increase in cash sales was due to festival occasions, and people chose to purchase jewelry with cash. Consequently, the addition u/s 69A was unjustified, and the decision favored the assessee.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.
TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
