Political contribution deductions require genuine transactions; banking records and party registration alone cannot defeat evidence of accommodation e...
Post-death GST liability permits fresh proceedings against legal representatives, while discontinued-business recovery remains limited to the inherite...
Non-confirmation of FEMA seizure prevents adjudicators from overriding pending appellate findings on recorded reasons and suspected foreign asset hold...
The HC quashed the reopening notice issued under section 148, holding that the disputed amount was a credit balance related to F&O trading, payments, margins, and interest, not an unsecured loan. The Court affirmed that trade advances are excluded from the scope of deemed dividend under section 2(22)(e), consistent with established precedents. It emphasized that loans and advances given in the normal course of business benefiting both parties do not attract section 2(22)(e). Further, the Court reiterated the necessity of a reasoned link to the formation of belief for reopening assessments. Consequently, the reassessment was invalid, and the assessee's appeal was allowed.
The HC quashed the reopening notice issued under section 148, holding that the disputed amount was a credit balance related to F&O trading, payments, margins, and interest, not an unsecured loan. The Court affirmed that trade advances are excluded from the scope of deemed dividend under section 2(22)(e), consistent with established precedents. It emphasized that loans and advances given in the normal course of business benefiting both parties do not attract section 2(22)(e). Further, the Court reiterated the necessity of a reasoned link to the formation of belief for reopening assessments. Consequently, the reassessment was invalid, and the assessee's appeal was allowed.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.