Tribunal ruled that reliance on statement of an alleged accommodation entry provider without furnishing statement or allowing cross-examination violated principles of natural justice.
The Orissa High Court modified a motor accident compensation award after finding that the Tribunal failed to deduct income tax while calculating loss of dependency. The Court recalculated compensation using the deceased’s taxable income under the new tax regime.
ITAT Agra held that an inadvertent disclosure of exempt income under “income from other sources” could not deny exemption to an educational institution. The Tribunal directed rectification of the tax demand after verifying eligibility under Section 10(23C)(iiiab).
ITAT Delhi held that the Revenue’s appeal was not maintainable after excluding Education Cess from tax effect computation. The Tribunal dismissed the appeal as the tax effect fell below the CBDT threshold limit of Rs.60 lakh.
Tribunal ruled that unsold flats shown as stock-in-trade by a real estate developer cannot attract notional rent taxation. The decision relied on earlier judicial precedents recognizing such assets as part of business operations.
Chennai CESTAT ruled that services provided directly to travellers for obtaining visas do not fall under taxable Business Auxiliary Service. The Tribunal relied on CBEC circulars and earlier judicial precedents.
The Calcutta High Court considered the petitioner’s request for adjournment of GST enquiry proceedings after he claimed inability to appear due to a leg fracture. The Court sought instructions on whether appearance could be made after 15 days.
ITAT Mumbai held that although foreign commission expenditure was non-genuine and liable for disallowance, amounts already written back and taxed in a subsequent year could not again be taxed through disallowance in earlier years.
ITAT Chennai held that before the 2016 amendment, DSIR approval under Section 35(2AB) related to the in-house R&D facility and not yearly expenditure quantification. The Tribunal upheld full weighted deduction despite partial approval in Form 3CL.
The ITAT Surat remanded a case involving a Rs.30 lakh gift treated as unexplained cash credit under Section 68. The Tribunal allowed the assessee another opportunity to submit bank records and explain the source of the gift.
