Assessment time-barred u/s 153 due to missing competent-authority reference for Singapore exchange of information; assessment disallowed as barred by ...
Imported menthol-scented sweet supari classification dispute: seizure quashed, release for home consumption subject to duty bond; bank guarantee refus...
CKD/SKD air-conditioner components classifiable with finished units by essential character; prior advance ruling extended three years, FTA benefits po...
Scope of judicial review under Article 226: supervisory, not appellate; factual reappraisal barred, challenge dismissed; insolvency professional dutie...
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 4826 
Join Channel 
