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...
Page of 4830
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
141 to 160 of 96587 Results
❮
❯
❯❯
0 / 200
Expand Note
Add to Folder
No Folders have been created
+
Are you sure you want to delete "My most important" ?
ITAT adjudicated on the validity of statements recorded during survey proceedings under Section 133A. The tribunal held that statements obtained during survey proceedings do not automatically bind the assessee. The burden of proof remains with the assessee to disprove such statements through substantive evidence. Critically, the presumption under Section 292C applies only to documents seized during a search from the assessee's premises, not those obtained during a survey of a third party. The tribunal relied on precedential rulings emphasizing that legal fictions are limited to their specific purpose. Consequently, the tribunal allowed the assessee's grounds, directing the Assessing Officer to delete the contested addition based on the lack of evidentiary value in the survey statements and inapplicability of statutory presumptions.
ITAT adjudicated on the validity of statements recorded during survey proceedings under Section 133A. The tribunal held that statements obtained during survey proceedings do not automatically bind the assessee. The burden of proof remains with the assessee to disprove such statements through substantive evidence. Critically, the presumption under Section 292C applies only to documents seized during a search from the assessee's premises, not those obtained during a survey of a third party. The tribunal relied on precedential rulings emphasizing that legal fictions are limited to their specific purpose. Consequently, the tribunal allowed the assessee's grounds, directing the Assessing Officer to delete the contested addition based on the lack of evidentiary value in the survey statements and inapplicability of statutory presumptions.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.