Institutional incapacity in customs settlement proceedings excludes non-functional quorum periods from statutory disposal timelines, preventing automa...
Interactive touchscreen panels with integrated computing functions fall under automatic data-processing machines rather than display monitors for cust...
Ex parte injunction service requirements were substantially met, while civil recovery and SFIO investigation into provident fund defalcation continued...
Enforcement of resolution-plan directions continues without a Supreme Court stay, preventing suspension of redistribution and escrowed-fund distributi...
Third-party ownership claims over attached property require Special Court adjudication where purchasers lack registered sale deeds and bona fides rema...
Pure-agent reimbursements in clearing and forwarding services are excluded from taxable value when qualifying third-party payments are properly record...
Customs relief for Strait of Hormuz maritime disruptions remains available, with existing conditions continuing unchanged through the extended validit...
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.