Development agreements require legal possession or effective enjoyment for capital gains transfer; permissive possession and deferred consideration de...
Prolonged sterilisation of development rights supports capital-gains treatment, while business-income disallowances cannot govern capital-gains comput...
Additional evidence in transfer pricing dispute leads to fresh examination, while tax deductions, TDS credit, fee and refund interest require verifica...
Category II AIF pass-through taxation preserves non-business income character; investment receipts cannot be reclassified without applying recognised ...
Mutual fund maturity rules require proper rollover, redemption, disclosure, and due diligence; investor gains cannot excuse regulatory breaches or pen...
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.