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...
The dominant issue was whether cash deposited by the company's directors and later transferred to the assessee's account for share purchase could be taxed as unexplained credit under s. 68. The Tribunal held that the authorities proceeded on mere suspicion by relying only on the directors' salary during the relevant year and routine expenses, without examining their prior savings or capital accumulation, and the first appellate authority upheld the addition without mandated inquiry, rendering the order arbitrary. It further held that, on these facts, the correct provision, if any, was s. 69A (unexplained money) and not s. 68, showing non-application of mind. The addition was deleted and the appeal was allowed - ITAT
The dominant issue was whether cash deposited by the company's directors and later transferred to the assessee's account for share purchase could be taxed as unexplained credit under s. 68. The Tribunal held that the authorities proceeded on mere suspicion by relying only on the directors' salary during the relevant year and routine expenses, without examining their prior savings or capital accumulation, and the first appellate authority upheld the addition without mandated inquiry, rendering the order arbitrary. It further held that, on these facts, the correct provision, if any, was s. 69A (unexplained money) and not s. 68, showing non-application of mind. The addition was deleted and the appeal was allowed - ITAT
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.
TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
of 4828 
Join Channel 
