Attachment and proclamation of sale of immovable property: limitation treated from financial year end; proclamation held within period, petition dismi...
Second Schedule attachment and validity of a post-notice mortgage: TRO cannot declare mortgage void ab initio; sale and appropriation allowed thereaft...
Limitation for final assessment under sections 144C and 153 treated jointly, resulting in quashing of timebarred assessment order and liberty to reviv...
Deductibility of settlement payments for securities law penalties and treatment of unexplained cash credits in share trading -- Tribunal upholds posit...
Threshold for allottee-initiated insolvency petitions in leasehold real estate upheld; petition admitted after possession letters deemed legally ineff...
Contravention of foreign exchange rules in crossborder diamond payments; appellate tribunal reduces one appellant's penalty for delay and proportional...
Disallowance of alleged bogus purchases/unexplained expenditure under s. 37 was held unsustainable where the AO relied solely on a third-party's subsequently retracted statement alleging invoice accommodation without delivery, without confronting or rebutting the assessee's documentary evidence. As the assessee produced recorded materials substantiating the expenditure and there was no finding of any actual purchases from the alleged biller (the group being only a transporter), and no corroborative material supporting the statement, a statement alone could not justify the addition. The disallowance was therefore deleted and the appeal of the revenue failed. - ITAT
Disallowance of alleged bogus purchases/unexplained expenditure under s. 37 was held unsustainable where the AO relied solely on a third-party's subsequently retracted statement alleging invoice accommodation without delivery, without confronting or rebutting the assessee's documentary evidence. As the assessee produced recorded materials substantiating the expenditure and there was no finding of any actual purchases from the alleged biller (the group being only a transporter), and no corroborative material supporting the statement, a statement alone could not justify the addition. The disallowance was therefore deleted and the appeal of the revenue failed. - ITAT
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.
TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
of 4828 
Join Channel 
