Political contribution deductions require genuine transactions; banking records and party registration alone cannot defeat evidence of accommodation e...
Post-death GST liability permits fresh proceedings against legal representatives, while discontinued-business recovery remains limited to the inherite...
Non-confirmation of FEMA seizure prevents adjudicators from overriding pending appellate findings on recorded reasons and suspected foreign asset hold...
Revision u/s 263 challenged for lack of proper inquiry by Assessing Officer regarding cash deposits during demonetization, scrap sales, and non-submission of audit report. ITAT set aside revision order. Substantial question of law raised. Held that department only challenged factual findings of Tribunal. Supreme Court precedents establish that no substantial question of law arises from factual findings unless perverse. Perversity defined as finding without evidence, unreasonable, based on surmises or suspicion. Tribunal's factual finding perverse only if affecting substantial rights of assessee unreasonably based on record. Tribunal examined facts in detail before ruling in assessee's favor. No perversity found in Tribunal's fact finding.
Revision u/s 263 challenged for lack of proper inquiry by Assessing Officer regarding cash deposits during demonetization, scrap sales, and non-submission of audit report. ITAT set aside revision order. Substantial question of law raised. Held that department only challenged factual findings of Tribunal. Supreme Court precedents establish that no substantial question of law arises from factual findings unless perverse. Perversity defined as finding without evidence, unreasonable, based on surmises or suspicion. Tribunal's factual finding perverse only if affecting substantial rights of assessee unreasonably based on record. Tribunal examined facts in detail before ruling in assessee's favor. No perversity found in Tribunal's fact finding.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.
TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
