All appeals dismissed; finding of anti-competitive bid-rigging upheld under Sections 3(3)(c), 3(3)(d) read with 3(1); cease-and-desist and total-turno...
Central Government notifies 11.541-hectare Special Economic Zone for semiconductor manufacturing; Approval Committee constituted, ICD status effective...
Government appoints National Customs Targeting Centre-Passenger director as customs officer with powers under PNR Regulations, 2022 and Sections 30A, ...
ITAT upheld the CIT(A)'s deletion of an addition under s. 69C, finding the AO's treatment legally unsustainable. The AO ignored comprehensive documentary evidence submitted by the assessee - ledger entries, supplier invoices, delivery challans, inventory registers, bank remittances, vehicle entry/exit records, lorry receipts and warehouse log books - and did not dispute their veracity. The tribunal noted the supplier's GST cancellation postdated the challenged purchases, undermining the AO's sham-transaction assertion. Given the assessee's substantiation and the AO's failure to engage with or controvert the evidence, ITAT confirmed that the addition was unjustified and upheld relief granted by the CIT(A).
ITAT upheld the CIT(A)'s deletion of an addition under s. 69C, finding the AO's treatment legally unsustainable. The AO ignored comprehensive documentary evidence submitted by the assessee - ledger entries, supplier invoices, delivery challans, inventory registers, bank remittances, vehicle entry/exit records, lorry receipts and warehouse log books - and did not dispute their veracity. The tribunal noted the supplier's GST cancellation postdated the challenged purchases, undermining the AO's sham-transaction assertion. Given the assessee's substantiation and the AO's failure to engage with or controvert the evidence, ITAT confirmed that the addition was unjustified and upheld relief granted by the CIT(A).
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.
TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
of 4828 
Join Channel 
