Estimation of income of the assessee who was working as Priest - ...

Income Tax

July 9, 2018

Estimation of income of the assessee who was working as Priest - mere retraction of statement without explaining circumstances as well as corroborating evidence, it cannot be accepted being an after thought.

View Source

← Previous Next →

Estimation of income of the assessee who was working as Priest - ...

Income Tax

July 9, 2018

You may also like:

Validity of retraction of the statement made in survey proceedings u/s 133A - It is always open for the revenue authorities to examine the correction of the retraction...

Addition - retraction of statement - It was voluntary and therefore, the retraction made after almost four years appears to be an afterthought, which had rightly been...

Addition u/s 68. - VDIS scheme - Retraction of statement - Assessee failed to discharge the onus - HC

Retraction of statement given during survey - evidentiary value of statement recorded u/s 131 - Despite the retraction, the initial findings of the CIT(A) were largely...

Clandestine manufacture and removal of goods - Retraction of confession statements - appellant did not want any enquiry on the duress, etc. - during second statement,...

Undisclosed income - retraction of the statement - the assessee has been consistent in his statements so recorded even during the post search proceedings when his...

Retraction of statements - onus to prove - the persons concerned have accepted the modus operandi to the knowledge of which, they alone are privy of. Retraction is an...

Retraction of statement - nothing has been brought on record by the assessee to substantiate its stand as to how it was prevented in making retraction immediately after...

Rejection of value and its re-determination of the duty - retraction of statements - The only thing which goes in favour of Revenue is that the Managing Director of the...

Addition on the basis of statements u/s 132(4) - presumption u/s 292C - retraction should be supported by a strong evidence stating that the earlier statement was...

Quick Updates: