The Tribunal observed that official salary documents issued by the employer and Income Tax Department showed salary income of only ₹4.67 lakh. The incorrect figure in the return was therefore held to be a typographical mistake requiring rectification.
The Tribunal held that effective opportunity was not provided before rejecting the applications for registration and approval. The matter was remanded to the CIT(E) for reconsideration in accordance with law.
CESTAT Bangalore held that limitation for filing a service tax appeal depends on the actual date of communication of the order, not merely the date of issuance. The Tribunal remanded the matter after finding no proof of delivery of the adjudication orders.
ITAT Pune held that delay caused by lack of proper legal advice and dependence on tax consultants constituted reasonable cause. The matter was remanded for fresh adjudication on Section 80P deduction.
CESTAT Delhi held that providing buses with drivers to RSRTC did not amount to Rent-a-Cab Service since operational control remained with the owner. The Tribunal set aside the service tax demand and penalties.
ITAT Mumbai accepted part of the assessee’s explanation that cash used for credit card payments came from family members. The Tribunal relied on income tax returns, bank statements, and affidavits while granting partial relief.
The Tribunal held that full disallowance of purchases was not justified where corresponding sales and quantitative stock records were accepted. ITAT sustained only estimated disallowance at 12.5% of disputed purchases.
ITAT Raipur held that additional evidence such as C-Forms cannot be relied upon by the appellate authority without giving the Assessing Officer an opportunity to examine it. The matter was remanded for fresh adjudication.
CESTAT Bangalore remanded the case after finding that the Department had granted exemption on similar rental income for subsequent periods. The Tribunal directed fresh examination due to inconsistent appellate findings.
Mumbai ITAT restored appeals dismissed for 179-day delay after observing that the assessee had relied bona fide on his Chartered Accountant. The Tribunal granted another opportunity in the interest of justice and fair play.
