Central Government appoints multiple Registrars of Companies with territorial jurisdictions under Section 396, Companies Act, 2013, effective 1 Januar...
Page of 4824
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
9601 to 9620 of 96463 Results
❮
❯
❯❯
0 / 200
Expand Note
Add to Folder
No Folders have been created
+
Are you sure you want to delete "My most important" ?
ITAT upheld the CIT(A)'s deletion of additions, holding that the satisfaction note did not identify any incriminating material seized that disclosed undisclosed income under s.153C; the transaction (sale consideration of Rs.10.43 crore) was already declared in the assesee's returns for AY 2012-13 and AY 2014-15 and assessed. The Tribunal found seized documents (including ikrarnamas and registered deed) related to the same disclosed transaction and were not shown to generate new incriminating information; revenue failed to demonstrate that seized material disclosed undisclosed income. Consequently, jurisdictional prerequisites for invoking s.153A read with s.153C were not satisfied, and the CIT(A) order deleting the addition was affirmed.
ITAT upheld the CIT(A)'s deletion of additions, holding that the satisfaction note did not identify any incriminating material seized that disclosed undisclosed income under s.153C; the transaction (sale consideration of Rs.10.43 crore) was already declared in the assesee's returns for AY 2012-13 and AY 2014-15 and assessed. The Tribunal found seized documents (including ikrarnamas and registered deed) related to the same disclosed transaction and were not shown to generate new incriminating information; revenue failed to demonstrate that seized material disclosed undisclosed income. Consequently, jurisdictional prerequisites for invoking s.153A read with s.153C were not satisfied, and the CIT(A) order deleting the addition was affirmed.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.