Revenue neutrality in domestic related-party loans can require deletion of interest transfer pricing adjustments after domestic-transaction verificati...
Pre-enactment land-sale agreements escape stamp-duty value substitution where substantial banking-channel consideration was received before Section 43...
Page of 4792
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
121 to 140 of 95833 Results
❮
❯
❯❯
0 / 200
Expand Note
Add to Folder
No Folders have been created
+
Are you sure you want to delete "My most important" ?
HC upheld the deletion of addition u/s 69 made on the basis of a notarized agreement recovered during survey proceedings. The AO/DDIT had relied solely on the agreement, without issuing summons to the third party or conducting independent investigation to verify its contents or to establish any actual flow of funds. CIT(A) and the Tribunal found that the assessee had, prior to the survey, lodged complaints before the PMO and Home Ministry alleging coercion in signing the agreement, reinforcing the claim that the document was not voluntary. In absence of corroborative evidence such as bank transactions or other material linking the assessee to unexplained investment, the addition was held unsustainable. HC concluded that the concurrent findings of CIT(A) and Tribunal were factual and reasonable, and that no substantial question of law arose, thereby dismissing the revenue's appeal.
HC upheld the deletion of addition u/s 69 made on the basis of a notarized agreement recovered during survey proceedings. The AO/DDIT had relied solely on the agreement, without issuing summons to the third party or conducting independent investigation to verify its contents or to establish any actual flow of funds. CIT(A) and the Tribunal found that the assessee had, prior to the survey, lodged complaints before the PMO and Home Ministry alleging coercion in signing the agreement, reinforcing the claim that the document was not voluntary. In absence of corroborative evidence such as bank transactions or other material linking the assessee to unexplained investment, the addition was held unsustainable. HC concluded that the concurrent findings of CIT(A) and Tribunal were factual and reasonable, and that no substantial question of law arose, thereby dismissing the revenue's appeal.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.
TaxTMI 
of 4792
Join Channel
TaxTMI 
