Commercial vehicle depreciation, scientifically determined warranty provisions and exempt-income disallowances were resolved in favour of the taxpayer...
Inherited property sale proceeds require capital-gains treatment where ownership is supported by evidence, not suspicion or unverified signature doubt...
Cross-examination of retracted statements is essential where foundational evidence supports a benami allegation and documented funding explanations re...
Capital-goods exemption covers plant-modernisation accessories, while the import restriction applies only to earlier capital-goods components and spar...
ITAT upheld CIT(A)'s order, dismissing revenue's appeal regarding unexplained cash deposits under Section 68 and Section 115BBE. The tribunal found that the assessee substantiated the cash deposits through bank certificates and sales receipts from audited accounts. No contrary evidence was presented by the Assessing Officer challenging the source of deposits. Similarly, for disallowance under Section 40A(3), the tribunal confirmed CIT(A)'s deletion of addition due to lack of specific violation proof. The revenue's contentions were rejected, and the appeal was comprehensively dismissed.
ITAT upheld CIT(A)'s order, dismissing revenue's appeal regarding unexplained cash deposits under Section 68 and Section 115BBE. The tribunal found that the assessee substantiated the cash deposits through bank certificates and sales receipts from audited accounts. No contrary evidence was presented by the Assessing Officer challenging the source of deposits. Similarly, for disallowance under Section 40A(3), the tribunal confirmed CIT(A)'s deletion of addition due to lack of specific violation proof. The revenue's contentions were rejected, and the appeal was comprehensively dismissed.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.