Political contribution deductions require genuine transactions; banking records and party registration alone cannot defeat evidence of accommodation e...
Post-death GST liability permits fresh proceedings against legal representatives, while discontinued-business recovery remains limited to the inherite...
Non-confirmation of FEMA seizure prevents adjudicators from overriding pending appellate findings on recorded reasons and suspected foreign asset hold...
AO made addition u/s 69A treating assessee's cash deposits during demonetization period as unexplained income on assumption of inflated/bogus sales without any cogent evidence. ITAT allowed assessee's appeal holding that AO cannot calculate sales hypothetically ignoring VAT returns, purchase bills, quantitative details etc. once sales were accepted and no deficiency pointed out in books of account. Mere substantial increase in turnover during demonetization without evidence of bogus sales is insufficient for addition.
AO made addition u/s 69A treating assessee's cash deposits during demonetization period as unexplained income on assumption of inflated/bogus sales without any cogent evidence. ITAT allowed assessee's appeal holding that AO cannot calculate sales hypothetically ignoring VAT returns, purchase bills, quantitative details etc. once sales were accepted and no deficiency pointed out in books of account. Mere substantial increase in turnover during demonetization without evidence of bogus sales is insufficient for addition.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.