Specified income of Baddi Barotiwala Nalagarh Development Authority receives conditional tax exemption, retrospectively covering its designated assess...
Specified development authority income receives retrospective tax exemption, subject to non-commercial activity, unchanged income sources, and return-...
Unified Brand India framework introduces voluntary Trust Mark certification and funding support for export branding, packaging and global promotional ...
Origin Declaration authentication governs preferential tariff claims under India-UK CETA, requiring a validated reference number before import clearan...
Separate assessment orders for different years remain valid when distinct notices and hearing opportunities prevent prejudice from combined proceeding...
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.