The issue involved eligibility of interest from employee loans. The tribunal ruled that such income is not directly linked to core credit activity. Therefore, it is taxable as income from other sources
The issue involved taxability of interest earned from statutory deposits. The tribunal held that such income is attributable to business activities and qualifies for deduction. This highlights the importance of statutory obligations in determining tax treatment.
The Supreme Court dismissed the Revenue’s appeal citing unexplained delay and no merit in challenging the High Court ruling. The High Court had quashed reassessment for lack of facts specific to relevant assessment years.
The Tribunal held that mere non-payment or expiry of limitation does not amount to cessation of liability. In absence of actual benefit or remission, addition under Section 41(1) was deleted.
The issue involved wrong filing of Form 10BB instead of 10B. The tribunal held that correction before processing cures the defect. This ensures that genuine claims are not denied on technical grounds.
The Supreme Court declined to interfere with the High Court’s refusal to entertain a writ petition due to availability of statutory appeal. It permitted the petitioner to file an appeal without being barred by delay.
The content outlines key filing deadlines and highlights penalties for non-compliance. The takeaway is that timely filing and payment are essential to avoid additional charges.
The issue was whether Section 153C could apply when the assessees own premises were searched. The tribunal held that such a person is a searched person, making Section 153A applicable instead. Consequently, assessments under Section 153C were quashed for multiple years.
The Court declined to interfere with the GST demand order as the petitioner had not availed the appellate remedy. It emphasized that disputes relating to adjudication must be addressed through statutory channels. The ruling reinforces the primacy of appellate remedies in tax matters.
The issue concerned failure to follow tribunal remand directions on comparables. The ruling held that such non-compliance caused procedural irregularity, leading to exclusion of certain comparables and recomputation of ALP.
