Proportionality in company penalty quantification requires aggravating and mitigating factors; mechanical multiplication of director liability is impe...
Page of 4813
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
3341 to 3360 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.