NCLT: Suspended Directors Who are Prospective Resolution Applicants Cann’t Access Valuation Reports  ||  Supreme Court Clarifies Test For Granting Bail to Accused Added at Trial under Section 319 CrPC  ||  SC: Fresh Notification For Vijayawada ACB Police Station not Required After AP Bifurcation  ||  SC: Studying in a Government Institute Does Not Create an Automatic Right to a Government Job  ||  NCLT Mumbai: CIRP Claims Cannot Invoke the 12-Year Limitation Period For Enforcing Mortgage Rights  ||  NCLAT: Misnaming Guarantor as 'Director' in SARFAESI Notice Doesn't Void Guarantee Invocation  ||  Jharkhand HC: Mere Breach of Compromise Terms by an Accused Does Not Justify Bail Cancellation  ||  Cal HC: Banks Cannot Freeze a Company's Accounts Solely Due To ROC Labeling a 'Management Dispute'  ||  Rajasthan HC: Father’s Rape of His Daughter Transcends Ordinary Crime; Victim’s Testimony Suffices  ||  Delhi HC: Judge Who Reserved Judgment Must Deliver Verdict Despite Transfer; Successor Can't Rehear    

Madhya Pradesh HC: Mere Statements Cannot be Considered as Incriminating Material - (24 Feb 2020)

DIRECT TAXATION

Madhya Pradesh High Court has held that the unexplained investments were made by the Assessing Officer merely based on the statements given during the survey and that there is no incriminating material or documentary evidence available with the Assessing Officer to substantiate the said additions for the assessment year.

Tags : MADHYA PRADESH HIGH COURT   INCRIMINATING MATERIAL OR DOCUMENTARY EVIDENCE  

Share :        

Disclaimer | Copyright 2026 - All Rights Reserved