Independent show-cause notices remain separate proceedings, while customs adjudication challenges should ordinarily follow the statutory appellate rem...
Institutional incapacity in customs settlement proceedings excludes non-functional quorum periods from statutory disposal timelines, preventing automa...
Interactive touchscreen panels with integrated computing functions fall under automatic data-processing machines rather than display monitors for cust...
Ex parte injunction service requirements were substantially met, while civil recovery and SFIO investigation into provident fund defalcation continued...
Enforcement of resolution-plan directions continues without a Supreme Court stay, preventing suspension of redistribution and escrowed-fund distributi...
Third-party ownership claims over attached property require Special Court adjudication where purchasers lack registered sale deeds and bona fides rema...
Pure-agent reimbursements in clearing and forwarding services are excluded from taxable value when qualifying third-party payments are properly record...
The sales declared by the assessee were treated as bogus, leading to an addition u/s 69A. However, the CIT(A) found that the AO accepted the purchases, inventory, and net profit declared by the assessee. The AO's presumption that the assessee rerouted their own funds was not backed by material evidence. Consequently, the addition was dismissed. Regarding reassessment proceedings, the approval granted u/s 151 was invalid as it was granted for another person's assessment, with the reason merely recorded as 'yes', indicating a mechanical approval. Therefore, the initiation of proceedings itself was held as bad in law, and the assessment made in the assessee's case was set aside. The assessee's appeal was allowed.
The sales declared by the assessee were treated as bogus, leading to an addition u/s 69A. However, the CIT(A) found that the AO accepted the purchases, inventory, and net profit declared by the assessee. The AO's presumption that the assessee rerouted their own funds was not backed by material evidence. Consequently, the addition was dismissed. Regarding reassessment proceedings, the approval granted u/s 151 was invalid as it was granted for another person's assessment, with the reason merely recorded as 'yes', indicating a mechanical approval. Therefore, the initiation of proceedings itself was held as bad in law, and the assessment made in the assessee's case was set aside. The assessee's appeal was allowed.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.