Proportionate interest, unexplained credits and partner remuneration disputed; proofs of fund nexus and lender identity were decisive and disallowance...
Capital gains valuation from stamp assessment versus net consideration for residential reinvestment: deemed stamp value replaced for gains but not for...
Revisionary jurisdiction was exercised where the Principal Commissioner found the trust deed empowered the trustee to add any person or charity to the class of beneficiaries, so benefits were not restricted to relatives; accordingly sums received could fall under the chargeable head invoked by the revising officer. The Tribunal agreed that the Assessing Officer failed to verify the genuineness of the trust's claim and did not form an express plausible view, making the AO's order erroneous and prejudicial and justifying revision under the statute; the assessee was given a chance to produce supporting evidence and the appeal was dismissed.
Revisionary jurisdiction was exercised where the Principal Commissioner found the trust deed empowered the trustee to add any person or charity to the class of beneficiaries, so benefits were not restricted to relatives; accordingly sums received could fall under the chargeable head invoked by the revising officer. The Tribunal agreed that the Assessing Officer failed to verify the genuineness of the trust's claim and did not form an express plausible view, making the AO's order erroneous and prejudicial and justifying revision under the statute; the assessee was given a chance to produce supporting evidence and the appeal was dismissed.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.