Reversal of input tax credit in proportion to exempt supply: specificity of show-cause notice required; order set aside, fresh proceedings allowed wit...
Benami transaction and beneficial ownership: documentary and circumstantial evidence show payors were true beneficiaries, resulting in PBPTA consequen...
Whether an outstanding loan liability could be taxed as remission/cessation under s.41(1) was rejected because s.41(1) requires a prior allowance/deduction and a trading liability that is remitted/ceased, typically evidenced by write-back/credit to P&L; here the amount was a capital loan used to repay a bank loan, no expenditure had been debited, no recovery was shown, and the liability remained acknowledged and continuously outstanding in the books, hence deletion of the addition was upheld. The plea of breach of r.46A failed as no additional evidence was filed before the first appellate authority, so r.46A was not attracted. Explanation 1 to s.41(1) was held inapplicable due to absence of any unilateral write-off of a trading liability. - ITAT
Whether an outstanding loan liability could be taxed as remission/cessation under s.41(1) was rejected because s.41(1) requires a prior allowance/deduction and a trading liability that is remitted/ceased, typically evidenced by write-back/credit to P&L; here the amount was a capital loan used to repay a bank loan, no expenditure had been debited, no recovery was shown, and the liability remained acknowledged and continuously outstanding in the books, hence deletion of the addition was upheld. The plea of breach of r.46A failed as no additional evidence was filed before the first appellate authority, so r.46A was not attracted. Explanation 1 to s.41(1) was held inapplicable due to absence of any unilateral write-off of a trading liability. - ITAT
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.
TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
of 4827 
Join Channel 
