The Tribunal held that its wide powers under Sections 241-242 and Rule 11 cannot override the mandatory conditions prescribed under Section 55 for redemption of preference shares. The ruling confirms that equitable jurisdiction cannot be used to bypass statutory safeguards.
The Jharkhand High Court directed the authority to implement the CESTAT order and determine whether a refund with interest or tax with interest was payable. The exercise must be completed within three months after hearing the petitioner, if necessary.
The ITAT dismissed the appeal after finding that the appeal fee was paid under an incorrect head and the 754-day delay remained unexplained. The Tribunal held that the defects were not cured and no condonation petition was filed.
This guide explains who needs a Drug License, the different license categories, eligibility requirements, required documents and the application process. It also highlights post-license compliance obligations and the consequences of operating without a valid license.
Know the income tax appeal process, hierarchy, filing procedures, timelines, powers of appellate authorities, and departmental appeal limits.
From April 1, 2026, PAN holders travelling abroad must submit Form 156 under the Income-tax Act, 2025. Learn the filing process and rules.
ITAT Delhi held that cash deposits recorded in audited books and linked to disclosed business transactions could not be taxed under Section 69A. The Tribunal deleted the ₹5.60 crore addition after finding the source of deposits was explained.
ITAT Mumbai held that Compulsorily Convertible Debentures could not be treated as equity merely to deny interest deductions. The Tribunal deleted the ₹76.45 crore transfer pricing adjustment arising from such recharacterization.
ITAT Ahmedabad held that a taxpayer cannot avoid responsibility for earlier failures to respond merely because the final notice was sent to a different email address. However, the matter was remanded for fresh consideration on merits.
The ITAT found inconsistencies in the selection and rejection of comparable companies for determining the arm’s length price of international transactions. It directed inclusion and exclusion of specific comparables and partly allowed the assessee’s appeal.
