Political contribution deductions require recipient party compliance with contribution-reporting conditions; banking-channel donations alone do not qu...
Aggregation under TNMM prevents selective testing of intra-group services without comparable uncontrolled transactions, while appellate additional cla...
Protective assessment cannot duplicate identical receipts under competing characterisations; remote services did not establish a taxable permanent est...
Current account treatment of overseas tournament services removed most FEMA findings, but excess EEFC remittance and delayed repatriation remained bre...
Modification of bail conditions remains available through inherent jurisdiction where onerous deposits undermine justice and cannot recover disputed d...
Merchant banker regulation consolidates registration, governance, capital, reporting, outsourcing and investor-protection requirements under an update...
Page of 4809
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
821 to 840 of 96177 Results
❮
❯
❯❯
0 / 200
Expand Note
Add to Folder
No Folders have been created
+
Are you sure you want to delete "My most important" ?
Remittances to Indian NRE accounts were held explained where the assessee produced tax residency certificates, foreign tax returns, bank statements and Indian account records showing long-standing foreign income and accumulated savings. The Tribunal found that the funds were transferred through banking channels with a direct nexus to the foreign bank account, so the explanation could not be rejected merely for non-compliance at assessment stage or for comparing remittances with the wrong income period. Because the remittances were satisfactorily explained, the linked investment in immovable property was also not treated as unexplained. The additions under section 69 were deleted.
Remittances to Indian NRE accounts were held explained where the assessee produced tax residency certificates, foreign tax returns, bank statements and Indian account records showing long-standing foreign income and accumulated savings. The Tribunal found that the funds were transferred through banking channels with a direct nexus to the foreign bank account, so the explanation could not be rejected merely for non-compliance at assessment stage or for comparing remittances with the wrong income period. Because the remittances were satisfactorily explained, the linked investment in immovable property was also not treated as unexplained. The additions under section 69 were deleted.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.