The case examined confirmation of a substantial addition without adequate factual analysis. The Tribunal ruled that justice demands a fresh decision after full consideration of bank statements and supporting records.
The dispute concerned rejection of explanation for cash deposits due to lack of documentation. The Tribunal ruled that evidence relating to sale of inherited assets was vital and must be examined afresh by the tax authorities.
The Court ruled that non-disclosure of a subsisting mortgage amounts to fraud, entitling the buyer to refund of advance despite alleged payment defaults.
The issue was whether compensation awarded for the death of a minor was grossly inadequate. The Supreme Court recalculated compensation using minimum wages, 40% future prospects, and multiplier 15, substantially enhancing the award.
The dispute concerned the scope of the deeming provision under Section 103 of the MSCS Act. The Court ruled that the deeming fiction operates only when the society’s objects, not merely its operations, span multiple States.
The issue was whether payment of substantial loan EMIs can be treated as proof of income. The Court ruled that EMIs, without corroborative evidence, cannot determine income, leading to a downward revision of compensation.
The ITAT held that penalty under Section 271(1)(c) fails where the notice alleged inaccurate particulars but the levy was based on concealment.
The ITAT set aside the appellate order after finding that the appeal was dismissed without proper hearing or examination of the assessee’s case.
The case addressed whether recorded purchases of ₹4.55 crore could still be treated as unexplained income. The Tribunal held that without evidence of off-book investments, section 69 has no application.
The Tribunal ruled that payments for IPL and MPLS bandwidth services do not constitute royalty under section 9(1)(vi) or Article 12(3) of the India-Singapore Tax Treaty, following consistent earlier rulings.
