The Tribunal clarified that granting limited broadcast rights without rights to modify or exploit content does not constitute royalty income. The ruling underscores the distinction between copyright transfer and mere broadcast reproduction rights.
The Tribunal reaffirmed that once expenditure is shown to be wholly and exclusively for business, section 37(1) disallowance cannot survive. Suspicion cannot override documentary and commercial reality.
Telangana High Court held that initiation of proceedings under section 143(3) of the Income Tax Act after 01.04.2021 without following provisions of section 144B i.e. assessment being carried out in faceless manner is not justifiable. Accordingly, orders are quashed and appeals are allowed.
ITAT Hyderabad held that trade advance given to goldsmith for making gold jewellery and excess amount paid has been received back in cash. The same cannot be added under section 68 of the Income Tax Act as unexplained cash credit. Accordingly, addition u/s. 68 is directed to be deleted.
The Tribunal held that when purchases are conclusively proved to be sham accommodation entries, the entire amount is disallowable under section 69C. Mere invoices and bank payments cannot override incriminating search evidence and admissions.
Patna High Court held that ITAT was not justified in reversing the order of CIT(A) without demonstrating any perversity, misreading of evidence, or application of an incorrect legal standard by the appellate authority. Accordingly, deletion of addition u/s. 68 by CIT(A) justified and writ allowed.
ITAT Mumbai ruled that Form 26AS is not conclusive when deduction of tax is otherwise established. Denial of TDS credit would amount to double taxation, which Section 205 expressly prohibits.
Kerala High Court held that the omission of sub-clause (j) to Section 66D of the Finance Act and, resultantly, imposition of service tax on ‘access to amusement facilities’ is unconstitutional. Accordingly, order set aside and appeal allowed.
The Tribunal deleted on-money additions where the tax department failed to establish a clear nexus between the assessee and alleged cash entries. Suspicion or unverified third-party material was held insufficient in law.
The tribunal held that Maximum Marginal Rate implies tax at the highest slab rate of 30%, not automatic levy of 37% surcharge. Surcharge must strictly follow slab thresholds prescribed in the Finance Act.
