Certificate-of-origin verification procedure governs preferential customs benefits; denial without retroactive verification was set aside with consequ...
Disciplinary Committee jurisdiction and mandatory investigation requirements invalidated cancellation of an insolvency professional's registration and...
Retention of seized property survives where recorded reasons support proceeds of crime, while stayed investigation periods are excluded from limitatio...
Specified income of Baddi Barotiwala Nalagarh Development Authority receives conditional tax exemption, retrospectively covering its designated assess...
Specified development authority income receives retrospective tax exemption, subject to non-commercial activity, unchanged income sources, and return-...
Unified Brand India framework introduces voluntary Trust Mark certification and funding support for export branding, packaging and global promotional ...
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 4803
Join Channel
TaxTMI 
