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...
A search statement under section 132(4) was held insufficient by itself to sustain an addition under section 69A where it was promptly retracted and no corroborative incriminating material was found. The Tribunal noted that the assessee explained the circumstances of the statement, while the Assessing Officer produced no seized jewellery, cash deposits, bank material, documentary trail, or other independent evidence to support the alleged receipt or its application. Because the addition rested only on the retracted statement and the statutory burden was not discharged by independent corroboration, the appellate deletion of the addition was upheld.
A search statement under section 132(4) was held insufficient by itself to sustain an addition under section 69A where it was promptly retracted and no corroborative incriminating material was found. The Tribunal noted that the assessee explained the circumstances of the statement, while the Assessing Officer produced no seized jewellery, cash deposits, bank material, documentary trail, or other independent evidence to support the alleged receipt or its application. Because the addition rested only on the retracted statement and the statutory burden was not discharged by independent corroboration, the appellate deletion of the addition was upheld.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.
TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
of 4817 
Join Channel 
