Admissibility of electronic evidence bars undervaluation demands where printouts, retracted statements and no cross-examination leave the case unprove...
Limitation in oppression and mismanagement proceedings: prior knowledge of removal and dilution barred the challenge, with valuation directions upheld...
Insolvency professional agency governance rules amended to add nominee directors, tighten independent director eligibility, and regulate managing dire...
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 
TaxTMI 
of 4819 
Join Channel 
