Transaction value rejection requires reliable corroboration; refundable VAT is excluded and temporary registration does not defeat new-vehicle exempti...
Appellate jurisdiction remains available where a wrist-worn gold ornament cannot conclusively be characterised as imported baggage at the preliminary ...
Written complaint requirement bars cognizance on police reports for securities offences, while unsupported breach of trust and cheating allegations fa...
ITAT allowed the assessee's appeal, setting aside the CIT(A)'s levy of tax under s.115BBE on amounts treated as unexplained under ss.69, 69A and 69B. The Tribunal held that the assessee had admitted undisclosed income during survey but adequately explained substantial components - excess cash partly financed excess stock (treated as business income), advances to debtors and investment in construction - by furnishing contemporaneous lists and declarations in the survey statement that the source was business income. Absent any rebuttal by the AO/CIT(A) that the recipients were non-customers or that funds were not business-generated, the impugned assessment under s.115BBE was not sustainable and the appeal was allowed.
ITAT allowed the assessee's appeal, setting aside the CIT(A)'s levy of tax under s.115BBE on amounts treated as unexplained under ss.69, 69A and 69B. The Tribunal held that the assessee had admitted undisclosed income during survey but adequately explained substantial components - excess cash partly financed excess stock (treated as business income), advances to debtors and investment in construction - by furnishing contemporaneous lists and declarations in the survey statement that the source was business income. Absent any rebuttal by the AO/CIT(A) that the recipients were non-customers or that funds were not business-generated, the impugned assessment under s.115BBE was not sustainable and the appeal was allowed.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.
TaxTMI 
of 4796
Join Channel
TaxTMI 
