Imported seaweed extract provisionally released on bond only; declaratory rejection set aside; appellate decision due within section 128-A(4-A) three ...
Page of 4823
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
9341 to 9360 of 96456 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 addition of unexplained investment, holding that the assessee (anonymized) failed to substantiate the source of funds for acquisition of immovable property for A.Y. 2016-17. The Tribunal found the unregistered agreement to sell inconsistent with bank evidence, noting purported receipt of consideration at the agreement date conflicted with actual cheque payments in July 2015, undermining documentary credibility. Further, the existence of an earlier joint development agreement and a supplementary agreement demarcating shares meant the developer lacked a definite sellable area before April 2012, rendering alleged payments prior to that date unverifiable. Consequently the assessee's claim was rejected and the assessment sustained against the assessee.
ITAT upheld the addition of unexplained investment, holding that the assessee (anonymized) failed to substantiate the source of funds for acquisition of immovable property for A.Y. 2016-17. The Tribunal found the unregistered agreement to sell inconsistent with bank evidence, noting purported receipt of consideration at the agreement date conflicted with actual cheque payments in July 2015, undermining documentary credibility. Further, the existence of an earlier joint development agreement and a supplementary agreement demarcating shares meant the developer lacked a definite sellable area before April 2012, rendering alleged payments prior to that date unverifiable. Consequently the assessee's claim was rejected and the assessment sustained against the assessee.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.