Business expenditure deduction requires proof of genuine commission payments and commercial allowability; turnover growth alone cannot validate the cl...
Article 8 treaty coverage excluded third-party airline support services, while documented demonetisation cash receipts remained accepted business inco...
Jurisdiction for notice under section 148 was tested on the material available when proceedings began, not on the income ultimately assessed. The Tribunal held that section 149(1)(b) permitted notice beyond three years where the Assessing Officer possessed books, documents or evidence indicating income represented in the form of an asset and likely to meet the statutory threshold. Cash withdrawals exceeding Rs. 1.50 crores, together with non-filing of a return, constituted tangible material for a prima facie view that the threshold was satisfied. The assessee's time-bar objection failed, and the reassessment notice was upheld as valid.
Jurisdiction for notice under section 148 was tested on the material available when proceedings began, not on the income ultimately assessed. The Tribunal held that section 149(1)(b) permitted notice beyond three years where the Assessing Officer possessed books, documents or evidence indicating income represented in the form of an asset and likely to meet the statutory threshold. Cash withdrawals exceeding Rs. 1.50 crores, together with non-filing of a return, constituted tangible material for a prima facie view that the threshold was satisfied. The assessee's time-bar objection failed, and the reassessment notice was upheld as valid.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.
TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
of 4827 
Join Channel 
