Jurisdictional validity: notice issued by a non jurisdictional officer invalidates reassessment where no formal transfer or independent verification o...
Page of 4828
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
5961 to 5980 of 96556 Results
❮
❯
❯❯
0 / 200
Expand Note
Add to Folder
No Folders have been created
+
Are you sure you want to delete "My most important" ?
Addition based on undisclosed income allegedly admitted during survey u/s 133A was deleted because the Revenue produced no substantive corroborative evidence, and a survey statement, particularly when promptly retracted and alleged to be obtained under coercion, lacks evidentiary value; reliance was placed on binding precedent holding that no addition can rest solely on such statement, supported by CBDT instructions to rely on material evidence, resulting in dismissal of the Revenue's ground. Disallowance u/s 40A(3) was upheld only to the extent sustained by the first appellate authority since detailed expense-wise verification showed certain payments were made through account payee cheque and the appellate findings disclosed no infirmity, leading to rejection of the Revenue's challenge. - ITAT
Addition based on undisclosed income allegedly admitted during survey u/s 133A was deleted because the Revenue produced no substantive corroborative evidence, and a survey statement, particularly when promptly retracted and alleged to be obtained under coercion, lacks evidentiary value; reliance was placed on binding precedent holding that no addition can rest solely on such statement, supported by CBDT instructions to rely on material evidence, resulting in dismissal of the Revenue's ground. Disallowance u/s 40A(3) was upheld only to the extent sustained by the first appellate authority since detailed expense-wise verification showed certain payments were made through account payee cheque and the appellate findings disclosed no infirmity, leading to rejection of the Revenue's challenge. - ITAT
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.