Electronic WhatsApp evidence without authentication or independent corroboration cannot sustain an unexplained-investment addition based on third-part...
Mutual current-account transactions excluded from deemed dividend treatment where no fresh borrowing arose; unsupported unsecured-loan addition also f...
The HC held that the impugned Order-in-Original and Order-in-Appeal were vitiated by breach of audi alteram partem and lack of proof of service, noting conflicting dates and adjournments contrary to the statutory regimen governing hearings. The Court found the petitioner was not afforded a fair hearing and that procedural irregularities (including multiple contrary issuance dates and absence of notice) rendered the proceedings invalid. The impugned orders are quashed and set aside, and the matter is remanded to the Adjudicating Authority for de novo adjudication in accordance with law after affording the Petitioner adequate opportunity of hearing. Petition allowed by way of remand.
The HC held that the impugned Order-in-Original and Order-in-Appeal were vitiated by breach of audi alteram partem and lack of proof of service, noting conflicting dates and adjournments contrary to the statutory regimen governing hearings. The Court found the petitioner was not afforded a fair hearing and that procedural irregularities (including multiple contrary issuance dates and absence of notice) rendered the proceedings invalid. The impugned orders are quashed and set aside, and the matter is remanded to the Adjudicating Authority for de novo adjudication in accordance with law after affording the Petitioner adequate opportunity of hearing. Petition allowed by way of remand.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.