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...
ITAT ruled against reopening of assessment under s.147 beyond four-year limitation period, finding no independent application of mind by AO or CIT(A). The tribunal rejected additions under s.68 regarding alleged accommodation entries, as the assessee provided sufficient evidence including ledger copies, invoices, and transport details for genuine business transactions. The revenue authorities' reliance on Investigation Unit's information without allowing cross-examination was deemed improper. The tribunal also dismissed allegations of unexplained commission payments for accommodation entries, noting the transactions were legitimate sales receipts from previous year, not undisclosed loans or share capital. Additions made purely on third-party information without corroborating evidence were set aside.
ITAT ruled against reopening of assessment under s.147 beyond four-year limitation period, finding no independent application of mind by AO or CIT(A). The tribunal rejected additions under s.68 regarding alleged accommodation entries, as the assessee provided sufficient evidence including ledger copies, invoices, and transport details for genuine business transactions. The revenue authorities' reliance on Investigation Unit's information without allowing cross-examination was deemed improper. The tribunal also dismissed allegations of unexplained commission payments for accommodation entries, noting the transactions were legitimate sales receipts from previous year, not undisclosed loans or share capital. Additions made purely on third-party information without corroborating evidence were set aside.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.