Charitable trust registration requires a specified-violation notice; settled cash deposits and related-party payments did not justify cancellation or ...
External development charges trigger TDS under section 194C, while disputed administrative payments require factual verification and fresh adjudicatio...
Section 270AA penalty immunity requires identified statutory defaults and a hearing before rejection; reassessment disclosure may constitute under-rep...
Section 80JJAA employee-cost deduction allowed for deployed staff but barred against transfer-pricing income enhancement, with pricing issues remanded...
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...
ITAT allowed Revenue's appeal, setting aside CIT(A)'s order that had deleted additions made by AO under s.153A. The Tribunal clarified that for assessment years abated as of the search date (02.05.2018), the AO could assess total income based on any material, not just incriminating evidence found during search. CIT(A) had erroneously treated the assessments as unabated. However, ITAT directed deletion of additions related to depreciation on plant/machinery and sub-contract payments, as these were based on third-party statements without allowing cross-examination or providing adequate opportunity for rebuttal to the assessee. The principle that third-party statements require corroborative evidence and opportunity for cross-examination was upheld.
ITAT allowed Revenue's appeal, setting aside CIT(A)'s order that had deleted additions made by AO under s.153A. The Tribunal clarified that for assessment years abated as of the search date (02.05.2018), the AO could assess total income based on any material, not just incriminating evidence found during search. CIT(A) had erroneously treated the assessments as unabated. However, ITAT directed deletion of additions related to depreciation on plant/machinery and sub-contract payments, as these were based on third-party statements without allowing cross-examination or providing adequate opportunity for rebuttal to the assessee. The principle that third-party statements require corroborative evidence and opportunity for cross-examination was upheld.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.