Disallowance under tax law for investment expenses cannot be applied mechanically; authority must record clear reasons before increasing assessee's su...
Appeal under Section 260A is confined to substantial questions of law and does not permit re appreciation of evidence or concurrent findings of fact; appeal dismissed to the extent it sought such re examination. The Revenue discharged its initial burden by issuing notices to counterparties and obtaining denials or non service, which constituted substantial evidence and shifted the onus to the appellant to produce creditworthy documents or witnesses; appellant failed to do so, so findings of bogus transactions were supportable. No procedural prejudice was shown as there is no record of a refused request to cross examine and the appellant did not produce parties or evidence.
Appeal under Section 260A is confined to substantial questions of law and does not permit re appreciation of evidence or concurrent findings of fact; appeal dismissed to the extent it sought such re examination. The Revenue discharged its initial burden by issuing notices to counterparties and obtaining denials or non service, which constituted substantial evidence and shifted the onus to the appellant to produce creditworthy documents or witnesses; appellant failed to do so, so findings of bogus transactions were supportable. No procedural prejudice was shown as there is no record of a refused request to cross examine and the appellant did not produce parties or evidence.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.
TaxTMI 
of 4805
Join Channel
TaxTMI 
