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 in part and dismissed Revenue's appeal. It held that amounts reflected in seized document BSIPL/01 represented investments of third parties and could not be treated as undisclosed sales or income u/s 69A; the document must be read as a whole and not selectively. Additions based solely on WhatsApp chats were deleted for want of corroborative evidence and on the footing that any presumption u/s 292C would arise, if at all, in the hands of the person from whose possession the chats originated. The Tribunal upheld deletion of additions on alleged bogus purchases, finding no extra profit, and deleted addition u/s 68 for unsecured loans, noting complete evidentiary support and subsequent repayment.
ITAT allowed the assessee's appeal in part and dismissed Revenue's appeal. It held that amounts reflected in seized document BSIPL/01 represented investments of third parties and could not be treated as undisclosed sales or income u/s 69A; the document must be read as a whole and not selectively. Additions based solely on WhatsApp chats were deleted for want of corroborative evidence and on the footing that any presumption u/s 292C would arise, if at all, in the hands of the person from whose possession the chats originated. The Tribunal upheld deletion of additions on alleged bogus purchases, finding no extra profit, and deleted addition u/s 68 for unsecured loans, noting complete evidentiary support and subsequent repayment.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.