Penny-stock additions require transaction-specific evidence; general investigation material alone cannot establish undisclosed income or accommodation...
Transfer pricing comparability prioritises reliable external CUPs and foreign-currency LIBOR benchmarks for exports, borrowings and delayed receivable...
Section 153C satisfaction and seized electronic records sustained unexplained-investment addition, subject to proportionate ownership-share verificati...
Payments of Rs. 19,66,698.77 made to a related party director within the two year look back period were treated as preferential transactions because the payments reduced the corporate debtor's liability to the related party and could not be excluded by tracing the source of funds. The tribunal held that Regulation 35A timelines are directory, not mandatory, and principles of natural justice were not breached where the adjudicating authority considered the appellant's written objections on merits despite an earlier ex parte notation. The liquidator's investigative power during liquidation to challenge preferential or undervalued transactions validated the challenge; appeals were dismissed.
Payments of Rs. 19,66,698.77 made to a related party director within the two year look back period were treated as preferential transactions because the payments reduced the corporate debtor's liability to the related party and could not be excluded by tracing the source of funds. The tribunal held that Regulation 35A timelines are directory, not mandatory, and principles of natural justice were not breached where the adjudicating authority considered the appellant's written objections on merits despite an earlier ex parte notation. The liquidator's investigative power during liquidation to challenge preferential or undervalued transactions validated the challenge; appeals were dismissed.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.
TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
of 4828 
Join Channel 
