Supreme Court: Uncrystallized Contractual Damages Not an Operational Debt under Section 9 IBC  ||  Supreme Court: Interest Accrued in Suspense Account After NPA Classification is Recoverable as Debt  ||  Supreme Court: S.69 GST Arrest Order with “Reasons to Believe” Must Precede Arrest  ||  Supreme Court: Winding-Up Proceedings Period Cannot be Excluded under Section 14 Limitation Act  ||  Supreme Court: Separate Appeals Unnecessary Against Common Judgment on Suit and Counterclaim  ||  Supreme Court: Unsuccessful Party Can Seek Post-Award Section 9 Relief in Exceptional Cases  ||  Delhi HC Rejects Black Money Act Challenge, Imposes Rs. 60,000 Costs over Prosecution Avoidance  ||  Delhi HC Affirms Teacher's POCSO Conviction, Urges Schools to Encourage Children to Speak Up  ||  Kerala HC: NGO Funding Peaceful Protests Can't Justify FCRA Renewal Denial  ||  Delhi HC: Courts Cannot Judge Sufficiency of Material For Issuing Look Out Circular    

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