Even though the assessee had no business operations, claims based on disclosed assets and records were held bona fide. The Tribunal ruled that such claims do not amount to inaccurate particulars or misreporting.
ITAT Hyderabad deletes ₹66.31 lakh capital gains addition, holding that execution of JDA does not constitute transfer under Section 2(47) where no consideration is received and possession is given only for development; no taxable event arises.
The tribunal held that cash deposits cannot be treated as unexplained when sufficient recorded cash receipts exist. Once books support availability, Section 68 additions fail.
ITAT Pune rules that delay in filing Form 67 is a procedural lapse and cannot deny Foreign Tax Credit under Section 90; directs AO to grant ₹2.74 lakh FTC after verification, upholding substantive relief despite delay.
ITAT Mumbai deletes ₹27.40 lakh addition under Section 69A, holding cash deposits as genuine business advances for car bookings, duly supported by confirmations, PAN, and invoices; non-response of customers cannot justify addition without proper verification.
The case involved non-maintenance of a functional registered office, evidenced by undelivered official communication. The authority imposed penalties, highlighting strict compliance with Section 12 requirements.
The case addressed prolonged possession of two DINs due to an inadvertent mistake. The authority imposed a ₹48,958 penalty, holding that duration of default justifies financial consequences despite bona fide intent.
This case examines whether an unintentional duplicate DIN attracts penalties under company law. The authority held that liability is strict, imposing a ₹50,000 penalty despite acknowledging bona fide conduct.
The ruling clarified that unverified electronic records and third-party statements cannot justify additions without proper verification. The absence of direct linkage and corroboration led to deletion of additions.
ITAT Hyderabad quashes reassessment as Section 148 notice, though dated 31.03.2021, was actually issued on 01.04.2021; failure to follow mandatory Section 148A procedure and obtain proper approval rendered proceedings invalid.
