The Tribunal ruled that when no new loans are borrowed or granted, taxpayers need not re-prove nexus annually. Interest paid deduction under section 57(iii) was restored.
ITAT Raipur ruled that cash deposits made by an advocate on behalf of clients cannot be treated as unexplained money under Section 69A. The AO and CIT(A)/NFAC conducted no inquiry and ignored over 100 supporting challans. This reinforces the principle that evidence and factual verification are essential before making additions.
ITAT Raipur set aside a Rs. 14.73 lakh addition under Section 69C after finding the CIT(A) misinterpreted the assessee’s wife’s financial capacity, affirming proper documentation supports legitimate expenditure.
Disallowance of ₹10.2 lakh on bank interest by the AO was reversed by ITAT, relying on favorable Karnataka HC rulings. The Tribunal confirmed that interest on surplus funds deposited in co-operative banks counts as business income eligible for 80P(2)(a)(i) deduction.
ITAT Bangalore held that disallowances under section 36(1)(va) for employee PF/ESIC contributions before AY 2021-22 were unsustainable, as Finance Act 2021 amendments are prospective. The Tribunal directed AO to delete additions, safeguarding assessee from retrospective impact.
The ITAT held that without pinpointing specific defects in books or vouchers, an arbitrary ₹50 lakh disallowance cannot stand. The ruling confirms that estimation cannot replace factual verification.
The Tribunal held that the assessee cannot be penalised for mistakes of his CA and condoned a two-year delay. The matter was remanded for de novo assessment, reaffirming natural justice principles.
A genuine FTC claim of ₹1.03 crore was partly disallowed due to a technical placement error in Form 67. The Tribunal restored the claim and sent it to the AO for verification and proper allowance.
ITAT held that cash sales forming part of disclosed turnover cannot be taxed again as unexplained cash credits. The ruling confirms that Section 68 does not apply when books are intact and evidence supports the sales.
Evidence demonstrated frequent withdrawals and redeposits across years, confirming the legitimacy of the cash held. The Tribunal ruled that the deposits were fully explained, warranting removal of the Section 69A/115BBE addition.
