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 assessee filed a revised return of income to correct the addition based on professional receipts in the original return. The hospital made a total payment of Rs. 47,26,546 to the assessee during the year, shown as professional receipts. However, there is no evidence to suggest that Rs. 1,89,909 pertains to a partial refund of deposits. Therefore, the addition of Rs. 1,89,909 is confirmed. The assessee proved payment to an anesthetist, and the addition related to this payment is directed to be deleted. The assessee substantiated payment to Dr. RK as professional fees through evidence, and this addition is directed to be deleted as the expenditure was wholly and exclusively for business purposes. Regarding petrol and diesel expenditure, the assessee failed to provide specific evidence, and the addition of Rs. 1,05,230 is upheld. The salary and wages addition of Rs. 48,950 is directed to be deleted as the amount remained payable for March 2020, and the assessee provided supporting documents without any discrepancy.
The assessee filed a revised return of income to correct the addition based on professional receipts in the original return. The hospital made a total payment of Rs. 47,26,546 to the assessee during the year, shown as professional receipts. However, there is no evidence to suggest that Rs. 1,89,909 pertains to a partial refund of deposits. Therefore, the addition of Rs. 1,89,909 is confirmed. The assessee proved payment to an anesthetist, and the addition related to this payment is directed to be deleted. The assessee substantiated payment to Dr. RK as professional fees through evidence, and this addition is directed to be deleted as the expenditure was wholly and exclusively for business purposes. Regarding petrol and diesel expenditure, the assessee failed to provide specific evidence, and the addition of Rs. 1,05,230 is upheld. The salary and wages addition of Rs. 48,950 is directed to be deleted as the amount remained payable for March 2020, and the assessee provided supporting documents without any discrepancy.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.
TaxTMI 
of 4786
Join Channel
TaxTMI 
