ITAT Kolkata deletes ₹7.84 crore addition on F&O and currency-derivative losses as AO relied solely on a now-vacated SEBI interim order. Tribunal emphasized that the assessee submitted full documentary evidence, which remained unrebutted, confirming losses as genuine.
Tribunal remands ₹88 lakh disallowance of long-term service award to the AO for fresh verification as employee-wise computation for the relevant year was not on record. Claim can be allowed only after proper quantification of ascertained liability.
The Revenue relied on third-party statements and WhatsApp data to allege an unrecorded ₹25 crore cash loan, but brought no supporting inquiry or cross-examination. The Tribunal held that the AO’s conclusion was speculative, especially when bank-backed evidence, TDS records, and a registered loan agreement supported only a ₹10 crore loan. Key takeaway: additions under Section 69A require concrete evidence, not assumptions.
ITAT Lucknow restored the reassessment u/s 147 after holding that CIT(A) misread the AO’s findings and wrongly assumed verification of books and cash deposits. The Tribunal found the appellate order perverse and allowed the Revenue’s appeal.
The ITAT Pune held that splitting royalties for domestic vs export sales was impermissible, deleting the entire transfer pricing adjustment. The ruling reinforces that TNMM aggregation for manufacturing includes royalties as a single element.
ITAT Delhi ruled that policy advocacy for EU businesses in India is charitable, as it has no profit motive and benefits the public. CIT(E)’s denial was set aside, and 12A registration restored.
ITAT restored the matter to the Assessing Officer since the assessee’s application for delayed 12A registration and condonation under Section 119(2)(b) was still undecided. The ruling underscores that exemption eligibility must be re-examined only after the competent authority disposes of the registration request.
ITAT clarifies that capital gains arise on the date of JDA execution, not registration, and allows reassessment if the agreement is cancelled before possession transfer.
ITAT Kolkata upheld deletion of ₹8.70 crore addition under Section 68, ruling that proper evidence and confirmations by loan creditors absolved the assessee. Arbitrary AO findings cannot justify tax.
The AO treated all commission and part of rent as bogus due to limited vouchers, no TDS, and identity gaps. The Tribunal found this approach inconsistent with the AO’s own initial proposal and disproportionate to the business realities of land-development. It concluded that only estimated disallowances of 20% commission and 50% rent were appropriate.
