The Tribunal reiterated that tax authorities cannot impose notional income merely because interest could have been charged. Commercial decisions on interest-free advances lie with the assessee, not the assessing officer.
The issue involved denial of charitable registration citing delay and lack of evidence. The Tribunal ruled that the assessee deserved a final opportunity to substantiate activities before a fresh decision is taken.
ITAT Delhi emphasized that FAR analysis governs segmentation for transfer pricing purposes. Artificial aggregation without disproving segmental allocation cannot justify adjustments.
The ITAT held that rejecting Rule 11UA valuation without verifying exclusions of non-realisable assets violates natural justice. Valuation additions were remanded for fresh examination, stressing non-mechanical application of deeming provisions.
The Disciplinary Committee imposed a monetary penalty after finding repeated failure to cooperate with the Investigating Authority. The ruling underscores that cooperation with investigations is a mandatory statutory duty.
