PMLA anticipatory bail requires satisfaction of twin conditions, while predicate-offence protection does not extend to independent money-laundering pr...
School-affiliation charges remain taxable where not directly connected with examinations, while extended limitation requires proof of deliberate tax e...
Concessional penalty for search-disclosed unreconciled jewellery applies where substantive disclosure conditions are met despite omission from origina...
Page of 4826
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
1 to 20 of 96510 Results
❮
❯
❯❯
0 / 200
Expand Note
Add to Folder
No Folders have been created
+
Are you sure you want to delete "My most important" ?
ITAT holds the reassessment proceedings under s.148A valid...
Reassessment under s.148A held valid; s.69 additions totaling Rs.7,00,000 deleted after acceptable contemporaneous explanations for property investment
Contents
Summary
Note
Bookmark
Share
✓ Copied successfully !
Print
Print Options
For full text, please login
Login to TaxTMI
Verification Pending
The Email Id has not been verified. Click on the link we have sent on
ITAT holds the reassessment proceedings under s.148A valid because the assessee failed to respond to notice u/s 148A(b), distinguishing the matter from the co-ordinate bench decision; the challenge to initiation of reassessment is therefore rejected. On merits under s.69, the Tribunal accepts the assessee's contemporaneous explanation - remittances from foreign employment, bank withdrawals, gift from mother and sale of old jewellery - for the total investment in the property, and finds no satisfactory material from the Revenue to displace that explanation. Consequently, additions of Rs.7,00,000 (Rs.2,00,000 cheque; Rs.5,00,000 cash) are deleted and the impugned additions under s.69 are set aside.
ITAT holds the reassessment proceedings under s.148A valid because the assessee failed to respond to notice u/s 148A(b), distinguishing the matter from the co-ordinate bench decision; the challenge to initiation of reassessment is therefore rejected. On merits under s.69, the Tribunal accepts the assessee's contemporaneous explanation - remittances from foreign employment, bank withdrawals, gift from mother and sale of old jewellery - for the total investment in the property, and finds no satisfactory material from the Revenue to displace that explanation. Consequently, additions of Rs.7,00,000 (Rs.2,00,000 cheque; Rs.5,00,000 cash) are deleted and the impugned additions under s.69 are set aside.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.