Jurisdictional facts in certificate-of-origin discrepancies can support customs show-cause proceedings, leaving factual explanations for departmental ...
Market value for captive electricity consumption follows industrial consumer tariffs, supporting profit computation for the power generation deduction...
Regarding the additions made u/s 153A, the ITAT held that since no incriminating material was referred to by the Assessing Officer (AO) during the search, no additions could be made in a completed assessment as per the Supreme Court's decision in Abhisar Buildwell Pvt. Ltd. Secondly, concerning the addition of bogus purchases, the ITAT observed that the purchases were accounted for in the regular books, and the source of payments was duly explained. Hence, the provisions of Section 69C were not applicable. Thirdly, regarding the addition u/s 69A, the ITAT upheld the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) [CIT(A)]'s deletion of the addition, considering the assessee's retracted undisclosed income figure backed by credible evidence and the presumption u/ss 132(4A) and 292C.
Regarding the additions made u/s 153A, the ITAT held that since no incriminating material was referred to by the Assessing Officer (AO) during the search, no additions could be made in a completed assessment as per the Supreme Court's decision in Abhisar Buildwell Pvt. Ltd. Secondly, concerning the addition of bogus purchases, the ITAT observed that the purchases were accounted for in the regular books, and the source of payments was duly explained. Hence, the provisions of Section 69C were not applicable. Thirdly, regarding the addition u/s 69A, the ITAT upheld the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) [CIT(A)]'s deletion of the addition, considering the assessee's retracted undisclosed income figure backed by credible evidence and the presumption u/ss 132(4A) and 292C.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.
TaxTMI 
of 4800
Join Channel
TaxTMI 
