Scope of judicial review under Article 226: supervisory, not appellate; factual reappraisal barred, challenge dismissed; insolvency professional dutie...
Courier transshipment of imported goods via named carrier to air cargo stations renewed until 30.01.2026; exemption conditional, strict controls apply...
Insurer's investment gains and investment write-downs face Section 263 revision; enquiry upheld, Rule 5(b)(ii) lapse sustained, late corrigendum quash...
Page of 4817
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
7241 to 7260 of 96333 Results
❮
❯
❯❯
0 / 200
Expand Note
Add to Folder
No Folders have been created
+
Are you sure you want to delete "My most important" ?
Addition under s.69 for alleged unexplained fixed assets was rejected because the assessee had consistently disclosed the same asset value in successive balance sheets and earlier return filings, and the AO produced no material to show investment during the relevant year; the addition was deleted. Enhancement of closing capital and rejection of closing cash balance were held unjustified since the disclosed cash-in-hand was supported by the balance sheet and GST returns, and denial of capitalization flowed from the AO's incorrect reduction of cash; enhancement was allowed. Addition under s.69A was quashed as the assessment was framed without a mandatory show-cause notice, vitiating the order; the addition was deleted. Consequential penalties under s.272A(1)(d) were deleted. - ITAT
Addition under s.69 for alleged unexplained fixed assets was rejected because the assessee had consistently disclosed the same asset value in successive balance sheets and earlier return filings, and the AO produced no material to show investment during the relevant year; the addition was deleted. Enhancement of closing capital and rejection of closing cash balance were held unjustified since the disclosed cash-in-hand was supported by the balance sheet and GST returns, and denial of capitalization flowed from the AO's incorrect reduction of cash; enhancement was allowed. Addition under s.69A was quashed as the assessment was framed without a mandatory show-cause notice, vitiating the order; the addition was deleted. Consequential penalties under s.272A(1)(d) were deleted. - ITAT
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.