Retention of seized property survives where recorded reasons support proceeds of crime, while stayed investigation periods are excluded from limitatio...
Specified income of Baddi Barotiwala Nalagarh Development Authority receives conditional tax exemption, retrospectively covering its designated assess...
Specified development authority income receives retrospective tax exemption, subject to non-commercial activity, unchanged income sources, and return-...
Unified Brand India framework introduces voluntary Trust Mark certification and funding support for export branding, packaging and global promotional ...
Origin Declaration authentication governs preferential tariff claims under India-UK CETA, requiring a validated reference number before import clearan...
Separate assessment orders for different years remain valid when distinct notices and hearing opportunities prevent prejudice from combined proceeding...
Reassessment based only on a Suspicious Transaction Report and an investigation wing report for verifying transactions with suppliers was held bad in law because suspicion-based material did not amount to information suggesting escapement of income. On the merits, the assessee supported the purchases with invoices, ledger accounts, confirmations, bank statements, GST records and other documents, and the Revenue failed to rebut that evidence. The Tribunal held that suspicion cannot replace proof, rejected gross profit estimation on a mere possibility of accommodation entries, and directed deletion of the entire addition. The Revenue's appeal was dismissed and the assessee's cross-objection was allowed.
Reassessment based only on a Suspicious Transaction Report and an investigation wing report for verifying transactions with suppliers was held bad in law because suspicion-based material did not amount to information suggesting escapement of income. On the merits, the assessee supported the purchases with invoices, ledger accounts, confirmations, bank statements, GST records and other documents, and the Revenue failed to rebut that evidence. The Tribunal held that suspicion cannot replace proof, rejected gross profit estimation on a mere possibility of accommodation entries, and directed deletion of the entire addition. The Revenue's appeal was dismissed and the assessee's cross-objection was allowed.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.