The tribunal held that interest earned on deposits with Cooperative Banks qualifies for deduction under Section 80P(2)(d), overturning the earlier disallowance.
The ITAT held that reassessment under Sections 147/148 is invalid if based solely on investigation reports, emphasizing the need for independent AO satisfaction.
The AO was directed to recompute capital gains based on DVO valuation but had ignored indexation. The Tribunal ruled that recomputation without indexation is legally impermissible.
ITAT Ahmedabad ruled that credit entries in the assessee’s account were correctly assessed, even though initial cash deposits belonged to a company, ensuring proper attribution of income.
The Revenue relied only on the builder’s settlement disclosure to tax the buyer. The ITAT held that third-party admissions, without corroboration or cross-examination, cannot fasten liability on the assessee.
Jaipur ITAT held that interest on a commercial property not used for business cannot be claimed as a business expense but is allowable under Section 24(b) from house property income.
Ahmedabad ITAT deleted Rs. 9.64 lakh addition under Section 69A, holding that only net interest income is taxable after deducting interest expenditure on borrowed funds.
The issue was whether an ex-parte reassessment for unexplained cash deposits could stand despite total non-compliance. The ITAT held that substantive justice required one final opportunity and remanded the case for fresh adjudication.
The reassessment was framed by NFAC before faceless powers under section 151A were notified. The ITAT held the entire reassessment without jurisdiction and quashed both reopening and addition.
The reassessments were initiated after four years based on section 68 but concluded under section 115BBC. The ITAT held that absence of valid jurisdiction and mismatch of sections rendered the reassessments void.
