Section 35(2AB) — the law in short
What the courts have decided on section 35(2AB), in one screen. Read this first; open an entry when you need the facts, the reasoning and the source.
-
Garware Technical Fibres Ltd v DCIT
ITATCuts both waysValidity unconfirmed
The addition rests on a pen drive seized in the search and no s.65B certificate was drawn at the time. Does that kill it?
No, not on these facts, and the reason is narrower than the headlines. The Commissioner (Appeals) called for a remand report, the Assessing Officer produced a certificate under s.65B(4) for the pen drive, and the assessee - which had never taken the point before the Assessing Officer - made no counter-comment when the certificate was put to it. On the record as the Commissioner (Appeals) found it the certificates had been drawn at the time of the search and were merely produced late. In the absence of any contrary material the addition based on the pen drive was upheld, for all eight years. The order was not otherwise against the assessee: on quantum it confined the tax to the profit element in the unrecorded receipts and directed year-by-year percentages, and on the weighted deduction it allowed the whole of the revenue expenditure for one year.
Listed strongest first: Supreme Court, then High Court, then Tribunal, then CBDT. Nothing here has yet been read in full by a chartered accountant — open an entry to see where it came from.