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...
Constitutional judicial review permits challenges to ECIRs and connected money-laundering proceedings where coercive action affects fundamental intere...
ITAT quashed the assessment order due to procedural non-compliance. The AO improperly initiated reassessment under Section 147 instead of Section 153C when loose papers suggesting a potential Rs.13 Cr payment were discovered during a third-party search. The tribunal found the AO lacked sufficient material evidence to substantiate the undisclosed income claim. Additionally, the absence of a mandatory Section 143(2) notice rendered the assessment unsustainable. Consequently, the tribunal deleted the income addition and accompanying penalty under Section 271D, emphasizing strict adherence to prescribed legal procedures in tax proceedings.
ITAT quashed the assessment order due to procedural non-compliance. The AO improperly initiated reassessment under Section 147 instead of Section 153C when loose papers suggesting a potential Rs.13 Cr payment were discovered during a third-party search. The tribunal found the AO lacked sufficient material evidence to substantiate the undisclosed income claim. Additionally, the absence of a mandatory Section 143(2) notice rendered the assessment unsustainable. Consequently, the tribunal deleted the income addition and accompanying penalty under Section 271D, emphasizing strict adherence to prescribed legal procedures in tax proceedings.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.