Penalty under section 271(1)(c) deleted where income was disclosed in section 153A returns and remaining additions were only estimated or computationa...
Page of 4809
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
4561 to 4580 of 96174 Results
❮
❯
❯❯
0 / 200
Expand Note
Add to Folder
No Folders have been created
+
Are you sure you want to delete "My most important" ?
Section 153C was upheld where the search warrant named only the searched persons, and the assessee's residence was covered in the course of that search, so the objection that assessment had to be framed under section 153A failed. Commission income from alleged hawala transactions was estimated at 0.3% of turnover because no evidence showed actual receipt and the higher rate was excessive. Cash found during search remained unexplained because the assessee produced no documentary proof to rebut the presumption arising from possession. A seized third-party voucher and loose papers were insufficient without independent corroboration, while the jewellery addition was deleted in light of customary family holdings and prior disclosures.
Section 153C was upheld where the search warrant named only the searched persons, and the assessee's residence was covered in the course of that search, so the objection that assessment had to be framed under section 153A failed. Commission income from alleged hawala transactions was estimated at 0.3% of turnover because no evidence showed actual receipt and the higher rate was excessive. Cash found during search remained unexplained because the assessee produced no documentary proof to rebut the presumption arising from possession. A seized third-party voucher and loose papers were insufficient without independent corroboration, while the jewellery addition was deleted in light of customary family holdings and prior disclosures.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.
TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
of 4809 
Join Channel 
