Transfer-pricing methodology protects commercially genuine associated-enterprise payments, while pre-2016 secondary adjustments and related notional i...
Negative liens over operating assets can constitute international transactions requiring arm's-length pricing reflecting restricted borrowing and expa...
Cross-examination rights in Customs Broker revocation inquiries require witness examination; procedural denial may be cured through fresh adjudication...
Governmental authority status supports construction-service exemption, while pre-cutoff contract and stamp-duty compliance requires verification on re...
Automated Free Sale and Commerce Certificates enable paperless processing while retaining risk-based manual verification for selected exporter applica...
Page of 4830
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
161 to 180 of 96587 Results
❮
❯
❯❯
0 / 200
Expand Note
Add to Folder
No Folders have been created
+
Are you sure you want to delete "My most important" ?
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.