Admissibility of electronic evidence bars undervaluation demands where printouts, retracted statements and no cross-examination leave the case unprove...
Page of 4813
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
3301 to 3320 of 96257 Results
❮
❯
❯❯
0 / 200
Expand Note
Add to Folder
No Folders have been created
+
Are you sure you want to delete "My most important" ?
Assessments u/s 153A for AYs 2012-13, 2013-14 & 2014-15 were made based on statement of third party and material from search of third party, without any incriminating material found in assessee's case. As per SC ruling in Pr. CIT v. Abhisar Buildwell, such additions are impermissible u/s 153A. For abated AYs 2015-16 onwards, AO's powers aren't limited to incriminating material from search. However, where AO accepted assessee's explanation on source of funds based on documentary evidence in remand report, CIT(A) erred in brushing it aside without substantive reasons. Additions sustained by CIT(A) despite AO's findings in remand report are unsustainable.
Assessments u/s 153A for AYs 2012-13, 2013-14 & 2014-15 were made based on statement of third party and material from search of third party, without any incriminating material found in assessee's case. As per SC ruling in Pr. CIT v. Abhisar Buildwell, such additions are impermissible u/s 153A. For abated AYs 2015-16 onwards, AO's powers aren't limited to incriminating material from search. However, where AO accepted assessee's explanation on source of funds based on documentary evidence in remand report, CIT(A) erred in brushing it aside without substantive reasons. Additions sustained by CIT(A) despite AO's findings in remand report are unsustainable.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.
TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
of 4813 
Join Channel 
