The tribunal held that where key sales and purchase documents were not examined at assessment, the issue must be remanded. Cash deposit additions were set aside for fresh verification by the Assessing Officer.
Madras High Court held that Settlement Commission doesn’t possess power to change the head of income and convert the undisclosed portion of income into income u/s. 699B. Further, Settlement application is bound to be rejected once Settlement Commission arrives at the conclusion that full and true disclosure is not done.
The Supreme Court affirmed that a single SCN covering several years is valid where fraudulent ITC patterns span periods, enabling holistic investigation under the CGST Act.
No incriminating material showed payment over the registered consideration. The tribunal held that without independent evidence, the ₹1.52 Cr addition could not be sustained.
The issue was whether revision could be invoked despite detailed verification of unsecured loans during scrutiny. The ITAT held that once enquiries are duly conducted, section 263 cannot be used for a deeper re-probe.
The issue was whether revision under section 263 could survive when no incriminating material was found for an unabated year. The tribunal held that without search-based evidence, the completed assessment could not be disturbed.
The tribunal noted that the firm had no business activity and only earned interest income. It held that unexplained income cannot be presumed in such circumstances when contributors are identified.
The case examined whether reassessment proceedings could survive when issued outside the faceless mechanism. The ruling confirms that non-compliance with the faceless scheme is a fatal jurisdictional defect.
The Tribunal ruled that amounts paid during investigation cannot be retained once the demand is set aside. Only lawful assessments can justify retention, and illegal collections must be refunded with interest.
The issue was whether delayed filing of Form 10B bars exemption for a charitable trust. The Tribunal held the delay to be procedural and sustained exemption since audit was completed and report filed during appellate proceedings.
