Governmental authority status supports construction-service exemption, while pre-cutoff contract and stamp-duty compliance requires verification on re...
Automated Free Sale and Commerce Certificates enable paperless processing while retaining risk-based manual verification for selected exporter applica...
Employee stock-shortage penalties do not constitute consideration for services, preventing GST collection under Schedule II in employment relationship...
ITAT upheld the order of the ld. CIT(A) in material respects. Additions u/s 68 on account of sundry creditors were rejected, as identity, creditworthiness and genuineness were established through confirmations and statements, and the AO had proceeded merely on suspicion without summoning most creditors. In respect of unsecured loans, ITAT confirmed the sustained addition of Rs. 18,00,000/- relating to three depositors, as the assessee did not press her appeal; deletions for the remaining amounts were upheld. For expenses incurred in vacating encroachers, ITAT affirmed the ld. CIT(A)'s partial allowance by estimating payment at Rs. 2,500 per square yard and directing recomputation of cost of acquisition. Development expenses were allowed as per ld. CIT(A), the AO's reliance on an Inspector's belated and non-technical report being rejected. Revenue's grounds were dismissed.
ITAT upheld the order of the ld. CIT(A) in material respects. Additions u/s 68 on account of sundry creditors were rejected, as identity, creditworthiness and genuineness were established through confirmations and statements, and the AO had proceeded merely on suspicion without summoning most creditors. In respect of unsecured loans, ITAT confirmed the sustained addition of Rs. 18,00,000/- relating to three depositors, as the assessee did not press her appeal; deletions for the remaining amounts were upheld. For expenses incurred in vacating encroachers, ITAT affirmed the ld. CIT(A)'s partial allowance by estimating payment at Rs. 2,500 per square yard and directing recomputation of cost of acquisition. Development expenses were allowed as per ld. CIT(A), the AO's reliance on an Inspector's belated and non-technical report being rejected. Revenue's grounds were dismissed.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.
TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
of 4828 
Join Channel 
