Retention of seized property survives where recorded reasons support proceeds of crime, while stayed investigation periods are excluded from limitatio...
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...
Assessment was held time-barred where clause (xii) of Explanation 1 to section 153 operated only as an exclusion of the period during which seized material was unavailable within the running limitation period, not as an enlargement of the total time for assessment; the order passed after the outer date was quashed. On merits, additions based on third-party seized cash entries were deleted because the material came from other entities, the witness retracted the earlier statement, and no independent corroboration connected the assessee to any cash receipt. Digital entries from a pen drive were inadmissible without a valid section 65B certificate, and presumptions under sections 132(4A) and 292C did not apply against the assessee. Section 56(2)(x) failed because actual receipt without consideration was not proved.
Assessment was held time-barred where clause (xii) of Explanation 1 to section 153 operated only as an exclusion of the period during which seized material was unavailable within the running limitation period, not as an enlargement of the total time for assessment; the order passed after the outer date was quashed. On merits, additions based on third-party seized cash entries were deleted because the material came from other entities, the witness retracted the earlier statement, and no independent corroboration connected the assessee to any cash receipt. Digital entries from a pen drive were inadmissible without a valid section 65B certificate, and presumptions under sections 132(4A) and 292C did not apply against the assessee. Section 56(2)(x) failed because actual receipt without consideration was not proved.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.
TaxTMI 
of 4805
Join Channel
TaxTMI 
