Form 26AS evidence requires successor-entity accounting verification after business transfer, while invoice-supported related-party advertising expend...
Money-laundering judgment timing requires awaiting the scheduled-offence decision despite continuation of the underlying trial where outcomes directly...
Accredited investor eligibility expands through securities-market exposure, while alternative investment fund disputes require prescribed resolution a...
Page of 4916
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
41 to 60 of 98302 Results
❮
❯
❯❯
0 / 200
Expand Note
Add to Folder
No Folders have been created
+
Are you sure you want to delete "My most important" ?
HC held that additions under Section 69A were valid based on seized diary notings. The entries in the diaries contained recordings of flat booking receipts, which were corroborated by reconciliation with formal accounting records. The court emphasized that diaries can qualify as books of accounts if they contain accounting information, particularly given the expansive definition under Section 2(12A). The fundamental premise that additions were made solely on standalone documents was rejected. The court noted that cash entries not reflected in software-based accounts could still be legitimate basis for tax assessment. Diary entries were not considered random documents but substantive evidence of financial transactions. No substantial legal question was found to merit further review.
HC held that additions under Section 69A were valid based on seized diary notings. The entries in the diaries contained recordings of flat booking receipts, which were corroborated by reconciliation with formal accounting records. The court emphasized that diaries can qualify as books of accounts if they contain accounting information, particularly given the expansive definition under Section 2(12A). The fundamental premise that additions were made solely on standalone documents was rejected. The court noted that cash entries not reflected in software-based accounts could still be legitimate basis for tax assessment. Diary entries were not considered random documents but substantive evidence of financial transactions. No substantial legal question was found to merit further review.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.