ITAT held that delayed filing of Form 10B cannot defeat Section 11 exemption if the audit report is available before processing under Section 143(1). The adjustment was deleted.
ITAT deleted additions after finding the AO relied only on ACB information without independent inquiry or supporting evidence. ITAT deleted additions after holding that estimated marriage expenses and FDR investment were unsupported by evidence and explanations remained unchallenged.
ITAT Delhi held that applying the gross profit rate of a different assessment year was excessive. It reduced the addition to 1% GP while holding that purchases still required proof of genuineness.
The Tribunal ruled that proceedings initiated under the old Section 153C framework after the Finance Act, 2021 amendments were legally unsustainable. It set aside all assessment orders for want of jurisdiction.
The article explains how the Finance Acts, 2025 and 2026 have reshaped the Updated Return regime under Section 139(8A). It highlights the extended filing timeline and the revised rules governing reassessment proceedings.
The ITAT Delhi held that although failure to file Form 10B disentitled the assessee from claiming exemption under Sections 11 and 12, the entire gross receipts could not be taxed where the expenditure was incurred for charitable purposes. The Tribunal upheld deduction of expenditure while denying the statutory exemption.
ITAT Mumbai held that an employee cannot be denied TDS credit merely because the employer failed to deposit the tax deducted from salary. The Tribunal directed verification of evidence and grant of full TDS credit under Section 205.
ITAT Mumbai held that penalty under Section 270A cannot be levied merely because income was estimated after rejection of books. Since the addition was based on estimation and not on specific concealed income, the penalty was deleted.
ITAT Mumbai held that purchases supported by invoices, e-way bills, transport records, bank payments, and GST documents cannot be treated as bogus merely because of allegations against the supplier. The Tribunal deleted the entire addition after finding no contrary evidence.
ITAT Cochin ruled that faculty engaged by a coaching institute were independent professionals and not employees. It held that TDS was correctly deducted under Section 194J, deleting the demand raised under Sections 201(1) and 201(1A).
