Specialized Investment Fund distribution now requires dedicated certification, while transitional recognition preserves existing qualified distributor...
Overlapping GST proceedings require Central and State authorities to designate one competent authority for coordinated adjudication of the same matter...
Composite healthcare supplies retain exemption when patient care is the contract's essential character, despite payment through an implementing agency...
Non-resident assessee, a regular income tax filer, was subject to best judgment assessment u/s 144 for unexplained investment in mutual funds u/s 69. Assessee submitted additional evidence u/r 46A, which the Assessing Officer and CIT(A) failed to consider properly. ITAT observed assessee is an NRI with income sourced outside India, and the investment was traceable from bank statements. CIT(A) rightly deleted the addition on mutual fund investment and long-term capital gains on sale of equity-oriented mutual funds, being exempt u/s 10(38). ITAT upheld CIT(A)'s order, finding no reason to interfere given the evidence on record.
Non-resident assessee, a regular income tax filer, was subject to best judgment assessment u/s 144 for unexplained investment in mutual funds u/s 69. Assessee submitted additional evidence u/r 46A, which the Assessing Officer and CIT(A) failed to consider properly. ITAT observed assessee is an NRI with income sourced outside India, and the investment was traceable from bank statements. CIT(A) rightly deleted the addition on mutual fund investment and long-term capital gains on sale of equity-oriented mutual funds, being exempt u/s 10(38). ITAT upheld CIT(A)'s order, finding no reason to interfere given the evidence on record.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.