The issue was whether revision could be invoked for allowing LTCG exemption on sale of investments. The Tribunal held that since the Assessing Officer examined the claim, the order was not erroneous or prejudicial.
The tribunal examined whether gold jewellery seized during police interception could be taxed as unexplained solely based on a statement recorded under enquiry. It held that additions fail where later evidence shows the assessment relied on weak corroboration and inconsistent reasoning.
The issue was whether revision under section 263 was valid for multiple expense claims. The Tribunal held that since the Assessing Officer had examined issues and adopted a plausible view, revision was unsustainable.
The case examined the correct tax rate for a trust formed exclusively for employees’ benefit. The Tribunal held that such trusts are taxable at normal AOP rates under section 164(1)(iv).
The dispute concerned whether reimbursements from an associated enterprise justified a transfer pricing adjustment using the profit split method. The Tribunal set aside the adjustment, directing a fresh FAR analysis before determining ALP.
Appeals were dismissed earlier as time-barred despite sustained efforts by the assessee through grievances. The Tribunal ruled that absence of negligence and bona fide conduct warranted condonation of long delay.
The Tribunal rejected estimated additions based on alleged circular trading due to lack of seized material or cash trail. The key takeaway is that suspicion and presumptions cannot replace evidence in search assessments.
The Supreme Court ruled that departmental proceedings initiated after superannuation were invalid due to absence of an enabling provision in service regulations. The key takeaway is that disciplinary jurisdiction ends at retirement unless expressly preserved by law.
The issue was whether mushroom-growing shelves could be classified based on their agricultural end use. The Court held that end use is irrelevant unless the tariff heading expressly permits it. Classification must follow the condition and nature of goods at the time of import.
The Supreme Court held that failure to issue a Section 21 notice does not invalidate arbitration where parties intended to arbitrate all disputes. The ruling clarifies that Section 21 is procedural, not jurisdictional.