Independent show-cause notices remain separate proceedings, while customs adjudication challenges should ordinarily follow the statutory appellate rem...
Institutional incapacity in customs settlement proceedings excludes non-functional quorum periods from statutory disposal timelines, preventing automa...
Interactive touchscreen panels with integrated computing functions fall under automatic data-processing machines rather than display monitors for cust...
Ex parte injunction service requirements were substantially met, while civil recovery and SFIO investigation into provident fund defalcation continued...
Enforcement of resolution-plan directions continues without a Supreme Court stay, preventing suspension of redistribution and escrowed-fund distributi...
Third-party ownership claims over attached property require Special Court adjudication where purchasers lack registered sale deeds and bona fides rema...
Pure-agent reimbursements in clearing and forwarding services are excluded from taxable value when qualifying third-party payments are properly record...
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 4798
Join Channel
TaxTMI 
