Inherited property sale proceeds require capital-gains treatment where ownership is supported by evidence, not suspicion or unverified signature doubt...
Cross-examination of retracted statements is essential where foundational evidence supports a benami allegation and documented funding explanations re...
Capital-goods exemption covers plant-modernisation accessories, while the import restriction applies only to earlier capital-goods components and spar...
Constitutional judicial review permits challenges to ECIRs and connected money-laundering proceedings where coercive action affects fundamental intere...
ITAT ruled that additions under section 68 were invalid as the assessee had not maintained books of accounts, making the provision inapplicable. The Tribunal noted that since no amount was found credited in any books of account, the AO's addition under section 68 was unsustainable. Additionally, the CIT(A) erroneously applied section 69A instead of section 68 in their appellate order, rendering the decision legally flawed. The assessee had actually incurred losses rather than gains. The Tribunal's decision emphasized that section 68 specifically requires the existence of books of accounts and credited entries therein. Appeal decided in favor of the assessee.
ITAT ruled that additions under section 68 were invalid as the assessee had not maintained books of accounts, making the provision inapplicable. The Tribunal noted that since no amount was found credited in any books of account, the AO's addition under section 68 was unsustainable. Additionally, the CIT(A) erroneously applied section 69A instead of section 68 in their appellate order, rendering the decision legally flawed. The assessee had actually incurred losses rather than gains. The Tribunal's decision emphasized that section 68 specifically requires the existence of books of accounts and credited entries therein. Appeal decided in favor of the assessee.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.