The tribunal confirmed penalties against a company and responsible directors for not realizing export proceeds of Rs.36 crores, emphasizing that commercial disputes cannot override FEMA obligations.
Tribunal upheld hawala and import undervaluation violations but significantly cut penalties for Dr. Manoharan and NTPL, fully exonerating two female directors. Key takeaway: Liability depends on active involvement, not mere association.
Delhi ITAT rules that reduction in percentage shareholding due to fresh share issuance is not a transfer under Income Tax law, providing relief to minority shareholders.
ITAT held that the assessee’s long-standing change of address constituted reasonable cause for late filing and remanded the case for merit-based adjudication.
The Supreme Court held that assignment of a decree for specific performance does not create any present right or title in immovable property. Therefore, such assignment deeds do not require registration under Section 17(1)(e) of the Registration Act.
The Court held that when multiple authorities are required to communicate an EC, the appeal limitation period begins from the earliest communication. Subsequent notifications cannot extend the period, emphasizing timely action by aggrieved parties.
The Tribunal upheld the CIT(A)’s findings after noting the assessee produced no evidence to counter verified disallowances. Key takeaway: appellate relief requires substantiated rebuttal of factual verification.
The Tribunal removed the interest disallowance after holding that the assessee’s earlier favourable ruling covered the issue. Key takeaway: once a factual issue is already adjudicated in the assessee’s own case, consistency must be maintained.
The ITAT sent back the issue of carry-forward business losses for re-examination because assessment records did not clarify earlier allowances. Key takeaway: loss set-off must be verified year-by-year before denial.
The case examines whether a Section 148 notice issued after the extended limitation period was invalid. Key takeaway: approval beyond three years required the higher authority under Section 151(ii), making the notice vulnerable.
