This case involved a ₹1 crore cash deposit treated as unexplained by tax authorities. The Tribunal ruled that since the deposit was sourced from earlier withdrawals, the addition was unsustainable.
It was held that documented capital contributions supported by affidavits, bank records, and land evidence are explained credits. Assessing authorities cannot disregard undisputed financial capacity.
Simply stopping operations or letting a license lapse does not close a UAE company. Formal license cancellation and VAT deregistration are both mandatory to avoid penalties.
The Tribunal held that although profiteering was initially computed, the developer had already passed on a higher amount to the buyer. With full discharge of Section 171 obligations, proceedings were closed.
The appellate order confirmed loan additions without addressing the Rule 46A plea. Holding this to be a serious procedural defect, the Tribunal set aside the order for de novo adjudication.
Recent reforms in gold, land, and PAN tracking hint at a structured buildup toward another demonetisation. The key takeaway is a tighter, more traceable system designed to close 2016-era loopholes.
The tax department has begun emailing taxpayers about pending demands shown on the portal. This explains why such demands exist and why the communication matters now.
GST law sets no deadline for deciding appeals, yet interest keeps accruing. Courts intervene where delay unfairly burdens compliant taxpayers.
The dispute centered on profit estimation after reopening for suppressed turnover. The Tribunal affirmed lower NP for animal sales, recognising industry norms and assessee history. The ruling underscores tailoring estimates to trade economics.
While reopening of assessment was sustained due to bank deposit information, the cash addition was deleted on merits. Proper explanation of source defeats Section 69A.
