Invoice-based recovery claims remain time-barred despite separate winding-up proceedings, absent valid acknowledgment or part-payment of the disputed ...
Extended limitation fails without specific suppression allegations, while overseas employee secondment remains taxable as manpower supply within norma...
Time-share accommodation classification excludes Club or Association Service where purchasers receive contractual occupancy rights without genuine mem...
CENVAT credit for trading requires reversal, while taxable-service rental credit remains proportionately available and limitation issues await resolut...
Page of 4792
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
61 to 80 of 95833 Results
❮
❯
❯❯
0 / 200
Expand Note
Add to Folder
No Folders have been created
+
Are you sure you want to delete "My most important" ?
The ITAT held that additions under section 153A based on purported bogus Long Term Capital Gains and commission expenses were unsustainable in the absence of any incriminating material discovered during the search. Following established precedent, the AO cannot invoke section 153A to reassess completed assessments without search-based incriminating evidence. Consequently, the Tribunal upheld the CIT(A)'s deletion of the additions. However, the CIT(A)'s direction to the AO to initiate proceedings under sections 147/148 was held to be beyond jurisdiction, as reopening cannot be indirectly mandated post section 153A adjudication, preserving the finality of proceedings. The Tribunal allowed the assessee's cross-objection, clarifying that the CIT(A)'s remit ended with the deletion of the additions, and any advice or compulsion for fresh litigation under section 147 was ultra vires.
The ITAT held that additions under section 153A based on purported bogus Long Term Capital Gains and commission expenses were unsustainable in the absence of any incriminating material discovered during the search. Following established precedent, the AO cannot invoke section 153A to reassess completed assessments without search-based incriminating evidence. Consequently, the Tribunal upheld the CIT(A)'s deletion of the additions. However, the CIT(A)'s direction to the AO to initiate proceedings under sections 147/148 was held to be beyond jurisdiction, as reopening cannot be indirectly mandated post section 153A adjudication, preserving the finality of proceedings. The Tribunal allowed the assessee's cross-objection, clarifying that the CIT(A)'s remit ended with the deletion of the additions, and any advice or compulsion for fresh litigation under section 147 was ultra vires.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.