Specialized Investment Fund distribution now requires dedicated certification, while transitional recognition preserves existing qualified distributor...
Overlapping GST proceedings require Central and State authorities to designate one competent authority for coordinated adjudication of the same matter...
Composite healthcare supplies retain exemption when patient care is the contract's essential character, despite payment through an implementing agency...
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 4805
Join Channel
TaxTMI 
