Revisionary jurisdiction under section 263 upheld; faceless assessments subject to revision when AO fails requisite enquiries, remitted for fresh asse...
Limited scope of processing under section 143(1): enhancement without show cause is unsustainable; remand for residency, taxation and TDS verification...
A retracted statement is not excluded merely because it is later withdrawn; it remains admissible if shown to be voluntary, the retraction is assessed on its own merits, and the reliance is supported by independent, cogent material. The Tribunal found no proof of coercion, accepted the statements recorded under FEMA as admissible, and held that liability did not rest on those statements alone. Seized notebooks, diaries, loose sheets, cash, and corroborating statements from others independently linked both appellants to the transaction, and the finding of contravention of Sections 3(b) and 3(c) of FEMA was upheld. The penalties were reduced, with the second appellant's pre-deposit adjusted against the reduced penalty.
A retracted statement is not excluded merely because it is later withdrawn; it remains admissible if shown to be voluntary, the retraction is assessed on its own merits, and the reliance is supported by independent, cogent material. The Tribunal found no proof of coercion, accepted the statements recorded under FEMA as admissible, and held that liability did not rest on those statements alone. Seized notebooks, diaries, loose sheets, cash, and corroborating statements from others independently linked both appellants to the transaction, and the finding of contravention of Sections 3(b) and 3(c) of FEMA was upheld. The penalties were reduced, with the second appellant's pre-deposit adjusted against the reduced penalty.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.
TaxTMI 
of 4807
Join Channel
TaxTMI 
