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 deleted additions under s.69B for alleged cash payment for old machinery purchase, finding the printout was not a "speaking document" that could sustain charges without corroborative evidence. The tribunal noted M/s Chetak Enterprises denied receiving cash, and the machinery's market value aligned with the valuation report. Similarly, additions under s.69C for alleged cash payments to suppliers were deleted as there was no admission of cash transactions from either the appellant or recipients, with evidence showing payments were made through banking channels. The ITAT criticized the AO for failing to gather corroborative evidence or allowing cross-examination of the alleged recipients, concluding there was no justification for sustaining either addition.
ITAT deleted additions under s.69B for alleged cash payment for old machinery purchase, finding the printout was not a "speaking document" that could sustain charges without corroborative evidence. The tribunal noted M/s Chetak Enterprises denied receiving cash, and the machinery's market value aligned with the valuation report. Similarly, additions under s.69C for alleged cash payments to suppliers were deleted as there was no admission of cash transactions from either the appellant or recipients, with evidence showing payments were made through banking channels. The ITAT criticized the AO for failing to gather corroborative evidence or allowing cross-examination of the alleged recipients, concluding there was no justification for sustaining either addition.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.
TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
of 4828 
Join Channel 
