The Tribunal examined whether an addition under section 153C could survive without seized material. It held that in an unabated year, additions are impermissible without incriminating evidence found during search, leading to deletion of the addition.
The Tribunal reaffirmed that revision cannot be exercised merely because the PCIT holds a different view. When the Assessing Officer’s view is plausible and based on enquiry, the assessment cannot be branded as erroneous or prejudicial.
The Tribunal examined whether an assessment ignoring a clear mismatch between turnover and TCS data could survive. It held that absence of enquiry on such discrepancy renders the order erroneous and prejudicial, justifying revision.
Mumbai ITAT ruled that Section 145A is a valuation provision, not a charging mechanism, and deleted a ₹38.26 lakh MODVAT/CENVAT addition, highlighting that proper accounting and reconciliation prevent artificial income.
The Tribunal ruled that a co-operative bank continues to be a co-operative society for the purpose of Section 80P(2)(d). Deduction was therefore allowed on interest income wrongly disallowed at the CPC stage.
The Tribunal ruled that a creditor’s write-off alone cannot trigger section 41(1) taxation. The assessee’s liability persisted in its books, and the ₹10.23 crore addition was deleted.
The tribunal ruled rental income from administrative buildings must be taxed under house property, not other sources, emphasizing consistent treatment across years. Key deductions for standard, sub-letting, and interest were allowed.
Relying on the Supreme Court’s decision in Rajeev Bansal, the Tribunal noted that even the Revenue admitted TOLA does not cover AY 2015-16. Notices issued after the original limitation period were therefore invalid.
The Tribunal ruled that non-filing of returns, absence of audited books, and lack of donor details defeat the claim for exemption under Section 13A. Voluntary contributions thus became taxable, though Section 68 additions were set aside.
ITAT Delhi held that compliance with the statutory hierarchy under Section 151 is jurisdictional and non-negotiable. Any deviation renders the 148A(d) order, notice under Section 148, and subsequent assessment invalid.
