Attachment and proclamation of sale of immovable property: limitation treated from financial year end; proclamation held within period, petition dismi...
Second Schedule attachment and validity of a post-notice mortgage: TRO cannot declare mortgage void ab initio; sale and appropriation allowed thereaft...
Limitation for final assessment under sections 144C and 153 treated jointly, resulting in quashing of timebarred assessment order and liberty to reviv...
Deductibility of settlement payments for securities law penalties and treatment of unexplained cash credits in share trading -- Tribunal upholds posit...
Threshold for allottee-initiated insolvency petitions in leasehold real estate upheld; petition admitted after possession letters deemed legally ineff...
Contravention of foreign exchange rules in crossborder diamond payments; appellate tribunal reduces one appellant's penalty for delay and proportional...
Additions for unexplained money failed where the Revenue relied on presumption without independent corroboration. For the alleged cash payment to or on behalf of Ms. Jwala Gutta, the Tribunal found that the seized material did not establish that the assessee himself made any cash payment, and there was no confirmation from Ms. Gutta or other supporting evidence; the addition was deleted. For the alleged cash component of marriage expenses, the Assessing Officer made no enquiry from the recipient and did not properly examine the possibility of funding from Shagun receipts, so the addition was also deleted. The Tribunal treated both additions as unsupported by evidence and allowed the appeal, with the same view applied to the other assessment years.
Additions for unexplained money failed where the Revenue relied on presumption without independent corroboration. For the alleged cash payment to or on behalf of Ms. Jwala Gutta, the Tribunal found that the seized material did not establish that the assessee himself made any cash payment, and there was no confirmation from Ms. Gutta or other supporting evidence; the addition was deleted. For the alleged cash component of marriage expenses, the Assessing Officer made no enquiry from the recipient and did not properly examine the possibility of funding from Shagun receipts, so the addition was also deleted. The Tribunal treated both additions as unsupported by evidence and allowed the appeal, with the same view applied to the other assessment years.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.
TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
of 4828 
Join Channel 
