Penny-stock additions require transaction-specific evidence; general investigation material alone cannot establish undisclosed income or accommodation...
Transfer pricing comparability prioritises reliable external CUPs and foreign-currency LIBOR benchmarks for exports, borrowings and delayed receivable...
Section 153C satisfaction and seized electronic records sustained unexplained-investment addition, subject to proportionate ownership-share verificati...
The Income Tax Appellate Tribunal set aside the assessment order for the assessee and restored the matter to the Assessing Officer for a de novo assessment after providing the assessee with a due opportunity of hearing. This decision aligns with the Tribunal's earlier ruling in the case of the co-owner, Dhirendra Nath Das, for the same assessment year. However, the Tribunal upheld the penalty imposed u/s 271(1)(b) for non-compliance with the notice issued u/s 142(1), considering the assessee's awareness of their responsibility as an employee of Indian Oil Corporation and the lack of a plausible explanation for non-compliance.
The Income Tax Appellate Tribunal set aside the assessment order for the assessee and restored the matter to the Assessing Officer for a de novo assessment after providing the assessee with a due opportunity of hearing. This decision aligns with the Tribunal's earlier ruling in the case of the co-owner, Dhirendra Nath Das, for the same assessment year. However, the Tribunal upheld the penalty imposed u/s 271(1)(b) for non-compliance with the notice issued u/s 142(1), considering the assessee's awareness of their responsibility as an employee of Indian Oil Corporation and the lack of a plausible explanation for non-compliance.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.