The ITAT held that an assessment made in the name of an amalgamated company is void ab initio, even where proceedings continued after merger intimation.
ITAT Mumbai held that goodwill arising from slump sale of a going concern is a depreciable intangible asset under section 32(1)(ii) for AY 2020-21, deleting disallowance.
It was ruled that under-reported revenue cannot be inferred solely from service tax data when no defects are found in regularly maintained books. Income must be assessed on real income principles supported by enquiry and evidence.
The Tribunal held that Section 54B requires purchase by the assessee himself. Investment in agricultural land in the wife’s name does not qualify for deduction.
The Tribunal held that the Assessing Officer failed to apply amended provisions taxing interest on enhanced compensation. Revision under Section 263 was upheld as the assessment was erroneous and prejudicial to revenue.
The Tribunal sustained reassessment based on search information but faulted the disallowance of political donations. The key takeaway is that additions cannot rest solely on untested third-party statements without cross-examination.
The Court ruled that omission to issue Section 143(2) vitiates reassessment at the root. Such a defect cannot be cured, even if the return is alleged to be defective.
The Court held that Section 197 applications cannot be rejected mechanically to “protect revenue.” Mandatory factors under Rule 28AA, including past assessments and liabilities, must be examined before directing withholding.
The High Court held that long-held, undeveloped land sold by the assessee gave rise to capital gains. Intention, holding period, and conduct outweighed Revenue assumptions.
The Tribunal ruled that professional consultancy services rendered by a UAE resident are protected under Article 14 of the India–UAE DTAA. In absence of a fixed base or sufficient stay in India, exclusive taxing rights rest with the UAE.
