The decision reiterates that the Revenue must prove that borrowed funds were actually used for non-business purposes. In absence of such proof, interest paid to banks remains allowable.
It was ruled that once books are accepted, expenses supported by ledgers, vouchers, and bank payments cannot be disallowed on suspicion. Ad-hoc estimation without rejecting books was held invalid.
The ruling emphasizes that statements relied upon by the Revenue must be confronted to the assessee with an opportunity of cross-examination. Failure to do so renders additions legally unsustainable.
The ruling clarifies that mere reproduction of third-party information alleging disproportionate assets is insufficient. The Assessing Officer must clearly identify escaped income and apply independent reasoning.
The Tribunal noted that no construction investment occurred during the year under appeal. Accordingly, no addition for unexplained investment could be sustained in that assessment year.
It was ruled that under-reported revenue cannot be inferred solely from service tax data when no defects are found in regularly maintained books. Income must be assessed on real income principles supported by enquiry and evidence.
It was ruled that section 80G(5B) expressly permits limited religious expenditure up to 5% of total income. Denial of approval without examining actual expenditure was held to be legally unsustainable.
Explains how routine corporate operations and mismanagement can cross into criminal fraud, highlighting the role of intent in triggering serious legal consequences.
Tribunal held that unsecured loans cannot be treated as unexplained where confirmations, bank statements, and tax returns establish identity, creditworthiness and genuineness through banking channels.
This article clarifies when e-invoicing is mandatory for export supplies under GST. It explains that only taxable exports require e-invoices, regardless of whether an LUT is filed. The key takeaway is that LUT affects tax payment, not e-invoice applicability.
