The Revenue alleged unexplained cash credits despite documentary evidence. The Tribunal ruled that once loans are repaid with interest and TDS, Section 68 cannot be invoked in isolation.
The compliance framework outlines layered regulatory obligations for NBFCs based on systemic importance. It highlights key filings and timelines essential for regulatory adherence.
Explains how GST law distinguishes detention under Section 129 from confiscation under Section 130, highlighting when authorities can legally invoke each provision.
The Supreme Court stayed GST proceedings after finding the show cause notice under Section 74 contained only figures without explaining fraud or suppression. The ruling stresses that detailed allegations are mandatory to invoke extended limitation.
Cash deposits were added as unexplained money due to alleged lack of proof. The Tribunal ruled that a plausible and documented source cannot be rejected without contrary evidence.
The Tribunal upheld taxation of rental receipts as income from house property because the companys principal object was not property letting. It ruled that business income treatment cannot be claimed merely based on incidental objects in the memorandum.
The Tribunal found that inadvertent allotment of two PANs led to duplication of bank accounts and misreporting of income. Proper reconciliation was directed before making any addition.
The case examined whether other additions can be made when the reopening issue is not sustained. The Tribunal held that reassessment cannot be used as a roving enquiry.
Registration was denied as activities allegedly exceeded declared aims. The Tribunal held that pending amendment justified remand for fresh adjudication.
ITAT Delhi held that disallowance of bad debts claimed as deduction under section 36(1)(vii) is not justifiable if offered as income in any year. Accordingly, AO directed to verify that amount for which bad debts have claimed u/s 36(1)(vii) were indeed offered as income for the said years.
