Revisionary jurisdiction cannot reopen share capital assessments where adequate inquiry supports a permissible view and no independent error is establ...
Reassessment jurisdiction fails where unverified portal information is aggregated without examining the taxpayer's explanation or relevance of entries...
Statutory sanction for delayed reassessment requires approval from the prescribed authority; approval by an inferior authority invalidates jurisdictio...
Transfer pricing margin adjustments require matching treatment of non-operating income and related costs, with comparability issues reconsidered on ev...
Preliminary-expense amortisation and MAT exempt-income adjustments prevailed, while trademark costs and managerial remuneration require fresh verifica...
Export valuation requires contemporaneous evidence; unrelated invoices cannot prove overvaluation, and dual penalties on firm and partner are impermis...
Ratification of resignation acceptance validates separation retrospectively, while withdrawal may be refused through reasoned administrative discretio...
CBDT Instruction No. 1916, though framed for non-seizure of jewellery during search, was treated as a relevant guideline recognising customary family holdings of jewellery. The Tribunal accepted that jewellery within the prescribed limits could not be regarded as unexplained investment merely because it was found during search, especially where the assessee furnished explanations supported by family holdings, a wealth-tax disclosure for the HUF, purchase bills, and statements recorded during search and assessment. On that basis, the addition under unexplained investment was directed to be deleted to the extent covered by the instruction.
CBDT Instruction No. 1916, though framed for non-seizure of jewellery during search, was treated as a relevant guideline recognising customary family holdings of jewellery. The Tribunal accepted that jewellery within the prescribed limits could not be regarded as unexplained investment merely because it was found during search, especially where the assessee furnished explanations supported by family holdings, a wealth-tax disclosure for the HUF, purchase bills, and statements recorded during search and assessment. On that basis, the addition under unexplained investment was directed to be deleted to the extent covered by the instruction.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.