<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?>
<?xml-stylesheet type="text/xsl" href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_sitemap/rss_feed_blog.xsl?v=1750492856"?>
<rss version="2.0" xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom">
  <channel>
    <title>ITAT: Seized Diary Entries Alone Not Sufficient Evidence u/s 153A to Establish Tax Liability Against Company.</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/highlights?id=85238</link>
    <description>ITAT ruled that entries discovered in a seized diary from RKY&#039;s premises were insufficient to establish liability against the assessee company u/s 153A. The Revenue failed to demonstrate a conclusive link between the diary entries and the assessee company&#039;s transactions. The tribunal emphasized that statutory presumption was inapplicable, and the burden of proof remained with Revenue to establish transaction authenticity. The simultaneous addition of these entries to another entity&#039;s assessment further undermined Revenue&#039;s position. ITAT held in favor of the assessee on dual grounds: lack of jurisdiction u/s 153A absent incriminating evidence, and failure to substantiate that entries exclusively pertained to the assessee company.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Tue, 28 Jan 2025 08:24:49 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Tue, 28 Jan 2025 08:24:50 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=792463" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>ITAT: Seized Diary Entries Alone Not Sufficient Evidence u/s 153A to Establish Tax Liability Against Company.</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/highlights?id=85238</link>
      <description>ITAT ruled that entries discovered in a seized diary from RKY&#039;s premises were insufficient to establish liability against the assessee company u/s 153A. The Revenue failed to demonstrate a conclusive link between the diary entries and the assessee company&#039;s transactions. The tribunal emphasized that statutory presumption was inapplicable, and the burden of proof remained with Revenue to establish transaction authenticity. The simultaneous addition of these entries to another entity&#039;s assessment further undermined Revenue&#039;s position. ITAT held in favor of the assessee on dual grounds: lack of jurisdiction u/s 153A absent incriminating evidence, and failure to substantiate that entries exclusively pertained to the assessee company.</description>
      <category>Highlights</category>
      <law>Income Tax</law>
      <pubDate>Tue, 28 Jan 2025 08:24:49 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/highlights?id=85238</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>