Online bond platforms may offer overseas-regulated products and tax-specific bonds subject to disclosures, compliance safeguards and revised complianc...
Corporate guarantee valuation permits actual ascertainable commission while barring retroactive application and extended-period penalties for bona fid...
Proper-officer jurisdiction under UPGST penalty provisions upheld; participation on merits prevents bypassing the statutory appellate remedy through w...
Transitioned CENVAT credit may validly satisfy mandatory pre-deposit requirements for legacy service tax appeals through Electronic Credit Ledger debi...
Building-plan sanction charges require statutory authority; unauthorised fees and GST were quashed, while labour cess must follow prescribed collectio...
Pure-agent exclusion fails where hotel booking facilitators receive third-party services themselves, making entire customer consideration taxable as r...
ITAT quashed additions made under section 153A for AY 2013-14 to 2015-16 due to absence of incriminating material found during search proceedings. The Tribunal emphasized that in unabated assessments, additions require supporting incriminating evidence discovered during search. Additionally, the approval granted under section 153D was deemed invalid as Additional CIT failed to demonstrate proper application of mind, merely providing symbolic approval without substantive review. The approval memo revealed delegation of statutory duty to subordinate AO, contrary to legal requirements. Following Abhisar Buildwell precedent, ITAT invalidated the assessment orders, holding them legally unsustainable due to procedural defects in both search-based additions and supervisory approval process.
ITAT quashed additions made under section 153A for AY 2013-14 to 2015-16 due to absence of incriminating material found during search proceedings. The Tribunal emphasized that in unabated assessments, additions require supporting incriminating evidence discovered during search. Additionally, the approval granted under section 153D was deemed invalid as Additional CIT failed to demonstrate proper application of mind, merely providing symbolic approval without substantive review. The approval memo revealed delegation of statutory duty to subordinate AO, contrary to legal requirements. Following Abhisar Buildwell precedent, ITAT invalidated the assessment orders, holding them legally unsustainable due to procedural defects in both search-based additions and supervisory approval process.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.