ITAT Mumbai held 100% bogus purchase disallowance unsustainable where sales and banking trail were proven; restricted addition to 5% profit element, following earlier years.
ITAT held that reassessment proceedings initiated by NFAC before Notification No. 18/2022 dated 29.03.2022 were without jurisdiction. Since Section 151A became effective only upon notification, the entire reassessment and related penalty were quashed.
The Tribunal reaffirmed that providing PAN, confirmations, bank statements, and financial records satisfies statutory requirements. With no defects found by the AO, the addition was rightly deleted.
The ITAT Mumbai held that CPC cannot make an adjustment under Section 143(1)(a) without issuing prior intimation and considering the assessees response, as mandated by the proviso to the section.
ITAT Mumbai held temporary alternate flat under development deal is not a “transfer” u/s 2(47); notarised agreement gave no ownership, so ₹13.56 lakh addition deleted.
The Tribunal ruled that reopening of assessment is void where the notice under Section 148 was issued prior to communication of sanction under Section 151. Such procedural lapse renders the entire reassessment null and void.
TAT Kolkata ruled that reopening based on unverified foreign information amounted to borrowed satisfaction. Since the sanctioning authority granted approval mechanically, the reassessment was declared void.
ITAT Mumbai deleted Sec 69 addition for alleged on-money, holding third-party statements and pen-drive data without cross-examination or corroboration are invalid evidence.
The Tribunal clarified that dismissal of an SLP does not amount to declaration of law under Article 141. It distinguished prior rulings and held that defective penalty notices invalidate the levy.
ITAT Mumbai held stamp duty value on allotment date applies u/s 56(2)(x) where full payment was made by cheque before agreement, not registration date value; matter remanded for verification.
