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 held that the assessee failed to substantiate, with independent evidence, the claim of prior occupation of the old premises to justify the concessional allotment of the redeveloped flat and thereby escape addition under s.56(2)(x). While observing that recital alone is insufficient and the burden of proof rests on the assessee, ITAT considered it appropriate, in the interest of substantial justice, to grant one final opportunity to produce corroborative material before the AO. ITAT therefore set aside the order of the CIT(A) and remanded the matter to the AO for de novo adjudication. ITAT also directed that, if the claim of old occupation is not proved, the AO may examine possible cash consideration and invoke ss.69A and 115BBE, if warranted. The appeal was allowed for statistical purposes.
ITAT held that the assessee failed to substantiate, with independent evidence, the claim of prior occupation of the old premises to justify the concessional allotment of the redeveloped flat and thereby escape addition under s.56(2)(x). While observing that recital alone is insufficient and the burden of proof rests on the assessee, ITAT considered it appropriate, in the interest of substantial justice, to grant one final opportunity to produce corroborative material before the AO. ITAT therefore set aside the order of the CIT(A) and remanded the matter to the AO for de novo adjudication. ITAT also directed that, if the claim of old occupation is not proved, the AO may examine possible cash consideration and invoke ss.69A and 115BBE, if warranted. The appeal was allowed for statistical purposes.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.