Charitable trust registration requires a specified-violation notice; settled cash deposits and related-party payments did not justify cancellation or ...
External development charges trigger TDS under section 194C, while disputed administrative payments require factual verification and fresh adjudicatio...
Section 270AA penalty immunity requires identified statutory defaults and a hearing before rejection; reassessment disclosure may constitute under-rep...
Section 80JJAA employee-cost deduction allowed for deployed staff but barred against transfer-pricing income enhancement, with pricing issues remanded...
Transfer-pricing methodology protects commercially genuine associated-enterprise payments, while pre-2016 secondary adjustments and related notional i...
Negative liens over operating assets can constitute international transactions requiring arm's-length pricing reflecting restricted borrowing and expa...
Cross-examination rights in Customs Broker revocation inquiries require witness examination; procedural denial may be cured through fresh adjudication...
ITAT upheld the order of the CIT(A) dismissing the revenue's appeal and directing deletion of additions under section 68 read with section 115BBE and section 69C. The Tribunal held that the AO mechanically relied on an investigation report without conducting independent inquiry or identifying any discrepancy in the assessee's documentary and banking proofs for share purchases and sales executed on the stock exchange. SEBI's probe did not name the assessee nor encompass the dates of the assessee's transactions, and the CIT(A)'s reasoned, speaking order correctly found absence of material infirmity in the evidence to sustain the addition; revenue's appeal was therefore dismissed.
ITAT upheld the order of the CIT(A) dismissing the revenue's appeal and directing deletion of additions under section 68 read with section 115BBE and section 69C. The Tribunal held that the AO mechanically relied on an investigation report without conducting independent inquiry or identifying any discrepancy in the assessee's documentary and banking proofs for share purchases and sales executed on the stock exchange. SEBI's probe did not name the assessee nor encompass the dates of the assessee's transactions, and the CIT(A)'s reasoned, speaking order correctly found absence of material infirmity in the evidence to sustain the addition; revenue's appeal was therefore dismissed.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.
TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
of 4828 
Join Channel 
