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 allowed the assessee's appeal and quashed the revisional order passed u/s 263. It was held that the AO had conducted adequate enquiry regarding the purchase and sale of listed shares, including verification of banking records, demat statements, broker confirmations, and STT-paid transactions. The assessee was found to be a regular investor, and the source of funds and genuineness of the transactions were duly established. Since no discrepancy or falsity in the evidence was alleged or proved, the assessment order could not be termed "erroneous and prejudicial to the interests of the Revenue" merely because the PCIT held a different view. Consequently, the addition contemplated u/s 68 did not survive.
ITAT allowed the assessee's appeal and quashed the revisional order passed u/s 263. It was held that the AO had conducted adequate enquiry regarding the purchase and sale of listed shares, including verification of banking records, demat statements, broker confirmations, and STT-paid transactions. The assessee was found to be a regular investor, and the source of funds and genuineness of the transactions were duly established. Since no discrepancy or falsity in the evidence was alleged or proved, the assessment order could not be termed "erroneous and prejudicial to the interests of the Revenue" merely because the PCIT held a different view. Consequently, the addition contemplated u/s 68 did not survive.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.