Charitable trust registration requires a specified-violation notice; settled cash deposits and related-party payments did not justify cancellation or ...
External development charges trigger TDS under section 194C, while disputed administrative payments require factual verification and fresh adjudicatio...
Section 270AA penalty immunity requires identified statutory defaults and a hearing before rejection; reassessment disclosure may constitute under-rep...
Section 80JJAA employee-cost deduction allowed for deployed staff but barred against transfer-pricing income enhancement, with pricing issues remanded...
Transfer-pricing methodology protects commercially genuine associated-enterprise payments, while pre-2016 secondary adjustments and related notional i...
Negative liens over operating assets can constitute international transactions requiring arm's-length pricing reflecting restricted borrowing and expa...
Cross-examination rights in Customs Broker revocation inquiries require witness examination; procedural denial may be cured through fresh adjudication...
Cash deposits in bank accounts were challenged by AO under section 69A as unexplained. Assessee demonstrated deposits originated from legitimate cash sales recorded in books of account, with complete documentation of purchases, sales, and inventory details. ITAT held that since individual cash transactions were below Rs. 2 lakh threshold, no customer PAN details were required. The tribunal accepted assessee's explanation that deposits during April-May 2019 were from regular business operations. CIT(A)/NFAC's reasoning was upheld, concluding section 69A provisions were inapplicable given proper documentation of source. Revenue's appeal dismissed as assessee successfully established nature and source of deposits through verifiable business records.
Cash deposits in bank accounts were challenged by AO under section 69A as unexplained. Assessee demonstrated deposits originated from legitimate cash sales recorded in books of account, with complete documentation of purchases, sales, and inventory details. ITAT held that since individual cash transactions were below Rs. 2 lakh threshold, no customer PAN details were required. The tribunal accepted assessee's explanation that deposits during April-May 2019 were from regular business operations. CIT(A)/NFAC's reasoning was upheld, concluding section 69A provisions were inapplicable given proper documentation of source. Revenue's appeal dismissed as assessee successfully established nature and source of deposits through verifiable business records.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.
TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
of 4828 
Join Channel 
