Charitable trust registration requires a specified-violation notice; settled cash deposits and related-party payments did not justify cancellation or ...
External development charges trigger TDS under section 194C, while disputed administrative payments require factual verification and fresh adjudicatio...
Section 270AA penalty immunity requires identified statutory defaults and a hearing before rejection; reassessment disclosure may constitute under-rep...
Section 80JJAA employee-cost deduction allowed for deployed staff but barred against transfer-pricing income enhancement, with pricing issues remanded...
Transfer-pricing methodology protects commercially genuine associated-enterprise payments, while pre-2016 secondary adjustments and related notional i...
Negative liens over operating assets can constitute international transactions requiring arm's-length pricing reflecting restricted borrowing and expa...
Cross-examination rights in Customs Broker revocation inquiries require witness examination; procedural denial may be cured through fresh adjudication...
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.