Online bond platforms may offer overseas-regulated products and tax-specific bonds subject to disclosures, compliance safeguards and revised complianc...
Corporate guarantee valuation permits actual ascertainable commission while barring retroactive application and extended-period penalties for bona fid...
Proper-officer jurisdiction under UPGST penalty provisions upheld; participation on merits prevents bypassing the statutory appellate remedy through w...
Transitioned CENVAT credit may validly satisfy mandatory pre-deposit requirements for legacy service tax appeals through Electronic Credit Ledger debi...
Building-plan sanction charges require statutory authority; unauthorised fees and GST were quashed, while labour cess must follow prescribed collectio...
Pure-agent exclusion fails where hotel booking facilitators receive third-party services themselves, making entire customer consideration taxable as r...
ITAT allowed the assessee's appeal, rejecting the Assessing Officer's (AO) arbitrary estimation of gross profit. The tribunal found no material defects in the books of accounts, no evidence of sales suppression, and no new land purchases. The AO's rejection of accounts solely based on lower gross profit compared to previous years was deemed incorrect. Without comparable industry data or market survey to justify the 9.94% gross profit estimation, the tribunal concluded that the addition to income was unwarranted. The decision was consistent with prior scrutiny assessments where the assessee's returned income was accepted with minimal adjustments.
ITAT allowed the assessee's appeal, rejecting the Assessing Officer's (AO) arbitrary estimation of gross profit. The tribunal found no material defects in the books of accounts, no evidence of sales suppression, and no new land purchases. The AO's rejection of accounts solely based on lower gross profit compared to previous years was deemed incorrect. Without comparable industry data or market survey to justify the 9.94% gross profit estimation, the tribunal concluded that the addition to income was unwarranted. The decision was consistent with prior scrutiny assessments where the assessee's returned income was accepted with minimal adjustments.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.