Governmental authority status supports construction-service exemption, while pre-cutoff contract and stamp-duty compliance requires verification on re...
Automated Free Sale and Commerce Certificates enable paperless processing while retaining risk-based manual verification for selected exporter applica...
Employee stock-shortage penalties do not constitute consideration for services, preventing GST collection under Schedule II in employment relationship...
ITAT deleted additions for unaccounted income from contractor,...
ITAT deletes additions for unaccounted income and unexplained jewelry following Rajeshwar Singh Yadav precedent and accepting engagement gift explanation
Contents
Summary
Note
Bookmark
Share
✓ Copied successfully !
Print
Print Options
For full text, please login
Login to TaxTMI
Verification Pending
The Email Id has not been verified. Click on the link we have sent on
ITAT deleted additions for unaccounted income from contractor, following precedent in Rajeshwar Singh Yadav case where similar factual circumstances existed involving Executive Engineer receiving alleged payments from same contractor. No substantial material differentiated appellant's case from established precedent. Regarding unexplained jewelry addition of Rs. 2,76,101 for 76.064 gms, ITAT accepted appellant's explanation that ornaments were engagement gifts from prospective in-laws when daughter got engaged. Wife's contradictory statement during search attributed to stress and husband's absence. ITAT found mathematical approach for partial jewelry addition imprudent when remaining 1651.046 gms adequately explained per CBDT Instruction 1916/1994, noting unreasonableness of expecting precise explanations from public servant with multiple family members. Both additions deleted and appellant's grounds sustained for relevant assessment years.
ITAT deleted additions for unaccounted income from contractor, following precedent in Rajeshwar Singh Yadav case where similar factual circumstances existed involving Executive Engineer receiving alleged payments from same contractor. No substantial material differentiated appellant's case from established precedent. Regarding unexplained jewelry addition of Rs. 2,76,101 for 76.064 gms, ITAT accepted appellant's explanation that ornaments were engagement gifts from prospective in-laws when daughter got engaged. Wife's contradictory statement during search attributed to stress and husband's absence. ITAT found mathematical approach for partial jewelry addition imprudent when remaining 1651.046 gms adequately explained per CBDT Instruction 1916/1994, noting unreasonableness of expecting precise explanations from public servant with multiple family members. Both additions deleted and appellant's grounds sustained for relevant assessment years.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.
TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
of 4828 
Join Channel 
