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...
Risk-based postal import clearance standardises electronic assessment, document requests, duty realisation and delivery controls at Foreign Post Offic...
Customs Cargo Service Provider appointment extends custodianship to additional terminal land, subject to cargo-control, security and licence condition...
ITAT directs Assessing Officer (AO) to verify facts regarding loan/deposit investments after providing reasonable opportunity to assessee. Tribunal found no merit in additions under Section 68 for advances to Rainbow Tech, Arun Muchhala Engineering College, Arun Muchhala Research & Education Centre, and loans from Sai Shiva Developers, Mucchala Magic Land P. Ltd., and Arun Muchhala Co-owners. The tribunal noted that most disputed amounts were opening balances or partially repaid, and transactions were conducted through banking channels. Consequently, the tribunal deleted additions made under Section 68 and upheld the assessee's claim, remanding the matter back to AO for further verification with proper procedural fairness.
ITAT directs Assessing Officer (AO) to verify facts regarding loan/deposit investments after providing reasonable opportunity to assessee. Tribunal found no merit in additions under Section 68 for advances to Rainbow Tech, Arun Muchhala Engineering College, Arun Muchhala Research & Education Centre, and loans from Sai Shiva Developers, Mucchala Magic Land P. Ltd., and Arun Muchhala Co-owners. The tribunal noted that most disputed amounts were opening balances or partially repaid, and transactions were conducted through banking channels. Consequently, the tribunal deleted additions made under Section 68 and upheld the assessee's claim, remanding the matter back to AO for further verification with proper procedural fairness.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.
TaxTMI 
of 4788
Join Channel
TaxTMI 
