Tag: statement u/s 132(4)
Additions based on statement recorded u/s 132(4) without considering Retraction Affidavit with evidences deleted In a recent judgment, ITAT has deleted additions which were based on only statement recorded u/s 132(4) and without taking note of the Retraction Affidavit filed by the assessee with relevant evidences. ABCAUS Case …
Income returned under other sources can not be recharacterised as income u/s 69A and subjected to higher tax u/s 15BBE – ITAT In a recent judgment, ITAT has held that Income returned by the assessee under the head income other sources can not be recharacterised as income u/s …
Cash credit addition u/s 68 made on the basis of statement retracted subsequently deleted by ITAT In a recent judgment, Cash credit addition u/s 68 made on the basis of statement retracted subsequently deleted by ITAT following law laid by Hon’ble Apex Court ABCAUS Case Law Citation:ABCAUS 3842 …
There is no prohibition to adjust seized cash with self assessment tax. Only prohibited is for adjustment of seized cash with advance tax – ITAT ABCAUS Case Law Citation:ABCAUS 3720 (2023) (04) ITAT Important Case Laws relied upon:ACIT vs. Narendra N. Thacker 82 taxmman.com 64Spaze Towers (P) Ltd …
Statement recorded u/s 132(4) is not sacrosanct merely because assessee failed to demonstrate any coercion and duress – ITAT ABCAUS Case Law Citation:ABCAUS 3708 (2023) (04) ITAT In the instant case, the assessee had challenged the order passed by the CIT(A) in upholding the addition of undisclosed income …
Addition for undisclosed foreign bank account deleted as the information received in pen drive under DTAC lacked basic essentials of a bank statement. In the instant case, the assessee was aggrieved by the order of the CIT(A) confirming the addition u/s 69 of the Income Tax Act, …
Addition based on statement recorded deleted as witness did not appear for cross examination on Departments notice ABCAUS Case Law Citation:ABCAUS 3345 (2020) (07) ITAT Important case law relied upon by the parties:Kishanchand Chellaram 125 ITR 713 (SC)Andaman Timber Industries 281 CTR 214 (SC The Assessee had challenged …
Retraction of statement u/s 132(4) after months on the ground of coercion. Assessee must give justifiable reason and cogent material to show that admission was not voluntary. ABCAUS Case Law Citation: ABCAUS 2391 (2018) 07 ITAT The instant appeal was preferred by the assessee against the order of …
Penalty u/s 271AAA-what constitutes substantiating how undisclosed income was derived-High Court explains prerequisites of statement u/s 132(4) to avert penalty ABCAUS Case Law Citation: ABCAUS 2247 (2018) (03) HC The Revenue was aggrieved by the order of the ITAT in deleting the penalty u/s 271AAA of the Income …
Statements made by stranger-third party in search case unless connected or corroborated could not be attributed to or lead to adverse consequences-HC ABCAUS Case Law Citation: ABCAUS 2133 (2017) (11) HC A search assessment was completed in respect of a group whose premises were subjected to search and …
