Religious purpose exclusion versus charitable purpose: non overriding religious objects do not attract Explanation 3, registration directed under sect...
Search-assessment proviso jurisdiction, time-barred valuation reports, and denial of cross-examination vitiate valuation-based and confession-based ad...
Proceeds of crime: provisional attachment confirmed; equivalent value attachment and acquisition date fair market value upheld, Covid exclusion preser...
Page of 4809
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
5661 to 5680 of 96177 Results
❮
❯
❯❯
0 / 200
Expand Note
Add to Folder
No Folders have been created
+
Are you sure you want to delete "My most important" ?
In search-related assessments under section 153A, additions were not sustainable in the absence of incriminating material found during the search. Cash shortage at business premises, cash found at residence, opening balance creditors, explained capital introduction, foreign currency purchases, and house construction/renovation were treated as explained on the record, while section 69C and section 69 additions failed because the revenue did not establish that the disputed expenditure or investment was outside the books. Disallowance under section 40A(3) also could not survive where the underlying expenditure was accepted and no specific contravening cash payment or rule 6DD breach was shown. The departmental appeals were rejected and the assessees' cross appeals were allowed to the extent additions had been sustained.
In search-related assessments under section 153A, additions were not sustainable in the absence of incriminating material found during the search. Cash shortage at business premises, cash found at residence, opening balance creditors, explained capital introduction, foreign currency purchases, and house construction/renovation were treated as explained on the record, while section 69C and section 69 additions failed because the revenue did not establish that the disputed expenditure or investment was outside the books. Disallowance under section 40A(3) also could not survive where the underlying expenditure was accepted and no specific contravening cash payment or rule 6DD breach was shown. The departmental appeals were rejected and the assessees' cross appeals were allowed to the extent additions had been sustained.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.