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...
The Income Tax Appellate Tribunal held that the Assessing Officer had rightly formed a 'reason to believe' and not merely a 'reason to suspect' regarding escapement of income based on the assessee's investment in property being disproportionate to their disclosed income. The approval u/s 151(2) for reopening assessment was properly granted after due application of mind by the Principal Commissioner. However, the Tribunal directed deletion of the addition made u/s 69 regarding unexplained investment, as the assessee had duly explained their share of the investment, while leaving the issue of unsecured loan and jewellery amount received by the assessee's wife to be examined separately.
The Income Tax Appellate Tribunal held that the Assessing Officer had rightly formed a 'reason to believe' and not merely a 'reason to suspect' regarding escapement of income based on the assessee's investment in property being disproportionate to their disclosed income. The approval u/s 151(2) for reopening assessment was properly granted after due application of mind by the Principal Commissioner. However, the Tribunal directed deletion of the addition made u/s 69 regarding unexplained investment, as the assessee had duly explained their share of the investment, while leaving the issue of unsecured loan and jewellery amount received by the assessee's wife to be examined separately.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.
TaxTMI 
of 4798
Join Channel
TaxTMI 
