Rejecting claims of legitimate book payments, the Tribunal found that amounts received from Future Maker Life Care were linked to money laundering. It upheld the ED’s attachment orders against Mind is King and its partners.
Appellate Tribunal confirmed that money is a liquid form of asset under FEMA Section 3(d), rejecting the exporter’s argument to the contrary in a fraudulent export scheme. The Tribunal confirmed the contravention but reduced the cumulative penalty from Rs.12 lakh to Rs.6 lakh.
The Appellate Tribunal dismissed the Union of India’s appeal seeking enhancement of the ₹1 crore penalty imposed on two individuals for FEMA violations related to an overseas property purchase. The Tribunal affirmed the Special Director’s decision, holding that the levied penalty was reasonable considering the facts, including the payment of a loan by the father despite the property being in the son’s name.
The Appellate Tribunal held that an attempted foreign exchange transaction is not a contravention under FEMA Section 3(d), as the Act requires an actual financial transaction. The Tribunal dismissed the Enforcement Directorate’s plea for confiscation of ₹89.70 lakh and ordered the refund of the balance after adjusting the penalties.
ITAT Mumbai quashed a Rs.10 lakh penalty under Black Money Act, ruling that DDIT(Inv.) lacked necessary pecuniary jurisdiction to impose penalties exceeding ₹5 lakh. Decision strictly enforces CBDT guidelines, which reserve penalty proceedings requiring JCIT approval for regular Assessing Officer, deeming DDIT(Inv.) order as being without jurisdiction.
ITAT Chennai deleted additions made in search assessments (u/s 153A), ruling that Income Tax Department cannot make additions without specific, incriminating material seized during search. Following Supreme Courts ruling in Abhisar Buildwell, Tribunal held that search assessments are not fishing expeditions and must be strictly limited to evidence found post-search.
ITAT Delhi deleted a Rs.20.33 crore penalty under Section 271(1)(c), ruling that penalty notice was invalid because it failed to specify exact charge: concealment of income or furnishing inaccurate particulars. Ruling reinforces that an ambiguous, omnibus notice is a jurisdictional defect that vitiates penalty, even if assessment order records satisfaction.
The ITAT Mumbai dismissed appeals under the Black Money Act as withdrawn after the assessee received full relief from the CIT(A), who deleted the additions on the merits of beneficial ownership. Since the Department did not challenge the relief, the assessee chose not to pursue the technical and jurisdictional grounds before the Tribunal.
The ITAT Hyderabad condoned a 211-day delay in filing an appeal, finding the delay was justified because the NFAC (CIT(A)) sent all crucial notices to incorrect email addresses. The Tribunal restored the appeal for fresh hearing, ruling that the ex parte dismissal violated the principles of natural justice due to improper service of notice.
ITAT deleted a Rs.54.85 crore tax addition, holding that make available clause of the India’s DTAA was not satisfied because routine IT support did not enable Indian entity to apply technology without provider’s ongoing reliance. A key takeaway is that mere recurring service provision, even with technical input, does not constitute make available of know-how.
