Transaction value rejection requires reliable corroboration; refundable VAT is excluded and temporary registration does not defeat new-vehicle exempti...
Appellate jurisdiction remains available where a wrist-worn gold ornament cannot conclusively be characterised as imported baggage at the preliminary ...
Written complaint requirement bars cognizance on police reports for securities offences, while unsupported breach of trust and cheating allegations fa...
The ITAT held that the AO lacked jurisdiction to reopen assessments for AYs 2012-13 and 2013-14 under section 153C, as no incriminating material was found during the search that could substantiate additions. The tribunal quashed the reassessment orders, finding the jurisdictional fact absent and following the Supreme Court's precedent in DCIT vs U.K. Paints. The statement from a third party was deemed insufficient to draw adverse inferences, and the tribunal directed deletion of additions made under section 69. Consequently, the assessee's appeals were allowed, invalidating the impugned assessment orders.
The ITAT held that the AO lacked jurisdiction to reopen assessments for AYs 2012-13 and 2013-14 under section 153C, as no incriminating material was found during the search that could substantiate additions. The tribunal quashed the reassessment orders, finding the jurisdictional fact absent and following the Supreme Court's precedent in DCIT vs U.K. Paints. The statement from a third party was deemed insufficient to draw adverse inferences, and the tribunal directed deletion of additions made under section 69. Consequently, the assessee's appeals were allowed, invalidating the impugned assessment orders.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.
TaxTMI 
of 4796
Join Channel
TaxTMI 
