Imported cement concessional duty exemption under Notification 4/2006 challenged over RSP misdeclaration; demand, interest and s.114A penalty set asid...
Reopening was upheld since approval u/s 151 validly relied on recorded "reasons to believe" founded on specific third-party RTGS information indicating alleged bogus purchases/expenses; hence reassessment proceedings were not vitiated. Addition u/s 69 was deleted because s.69 applies only where unrecorded "investments" are found, and alleged bogus purchases recorded in the books do not constitute unrecorded investments; absent any stock/inventory discrepancy or rejection of books, and with no allegation that purchase funding was outside known book sources, the assessee's onus to explain nature and source stood satisfied. Appeal allowed. - ITAT
Reopening was upheld since approval u/s 151 validly relied on recorded "reasons to believe" founded on specific third-party RTGS information indicating alleged bogus purchases/expenses; hence reassessment proceedings were not vitiated. Addition u/s 69 was deleted because s.69 applies only where unrecorded "investments" are found, and alleged bogus purchases recorded in the books do not constitute unrecorded investments; absent any stock/inventory discrepancy or rejection of books, and with no allegation that purchase funding was outside known book sources, the assessee's onus to explain nature and source stood satisfied. Appeal allowed. - ITAT
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.
TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
of 4821 
Join Channel 
