Patent-settlement expenditure treated as commercially expedient revenue outlay, with foreign-law restrictions inapplicable before the prospective amen...
International transaction benchmarking restricts transfer pricing adjustments to associated-enterprise dealings, while functional comparability govern...
Joint development agreements defer taxable transfer where possession lacks part performance, while completed flats determine consideration and exempti...
Passenger baggage re-export requires true declaration and cannot be granted indirectly through discretionary redemption of undeclared prohibited goods...
Page of 4803
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
501 to 520 of 96046 Results
❮
❯
❯❯
0 / 200
Expand Note
Add to Folder
No Folders have been created
+
Are you sure you want to delete "My most important" ?
ITAT upheld addition under section 68 regarding unexplained cash deposits of Rs. 78,00,000/- as assessee failed to provide satisfactory explanation or supporting documentation despite opportunities from AO and CIT(A). Assessee's alternative plea to apply 8% presumptive taxation under section 44AD was rejected as turnover exceeded eligible threshold of Rs. 60 lakh. However, ITAT deleted AO's addition of 8% presumptive tax on remaining turnover of Rs. 28,14,676/-, accepting explanation that deposits originated from assessee's business profits and father's savings/business accruals. Tribunal found father's business history with turnover between Rs. 51-62 lakh made explanation plausible. Appeal partially allowed with respect to smaller cash deposits while maintaining primary addition under section 68.
ITAT upheld addition under section 68 regarding unexplained cash deposits of Rs. 78,00,000/- as assessee failed to provide satisfactory explanation or supporting documentation despite opportunities from AO and CIT(A). Assessee's alternative plea to apply 8% presumptive taxation under section 44AD was rejected as turnover exceeded eligible threshold of Rs. 60 lakh. However, ITAT deleted AO's addition of 8% presumptive tax on remaining turnover of Rs. 28,14,676/-, accepting explanation that deposits originated from assessee's business profits and father's savings/business accruals. Tribunal found father's business history with turnover between Rs. 51-62 lakh made explanation plausible. Appeal partially allowed with respect to smaller cash deposits while maintaining primary addition under section 68.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.