PMLA anticipatory bail requires satisfaction of twin conditions, while predicate-offence protection does not extend to independent money-laundering pr...
School-affiliation charges remain taxable where not directly connected with examinations, while extended limitation requires proof of deliberate tax e...
ITAT ruled in favor of the taxpayer regarding disputed cash deposits during demonetization. The assessee had properly recorded cash sales in accounting books and provided requisite documentation supporting the transactions. While AO had partially accepted sales records, certain deposits made on 13.11.2016 were questioned solely due to timing during demonetization. Given that complete sales documentation was maintained and verified through standard procedures, ITAT found no justification for treating these recorded sales as unexplained cash deposits under s.68. The addition made by AO was accordingly deleted, as differential treatment of same category of transactions based merely on deposit timing was deemed inappropriate.
ITAT ruled in favor of the taxpayer regarding disputed cash deposits during demonetization. The assessee had properly recorded cash sales in accounting books and provided requisite documentation supporting the transactions. While AO had partially accepted sales records, certain deposits made on 13.11.2016 were questioned solely due to timing during demonetization. Given that complete sales documentation was maintained and verified through standard procedures, ITAT found no justification for treating these recorded sales as unexplained cash deposits under s.68. The addition made by AO was accordingly deleted, as differential treatment of same category of transactions based merely on deposit timing was deemed inappropriate.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.