The Tribunal held that prior to the 2023 amendment, returns filed within the broader time under Section 139 were eligible for exemption. It ruled that updated returns could not be denied benefits retrospectively.
The issue involved dismissal of appeal due to delay and non-appearance. The tribunal condoned the delay citing medical reasons and remanded the matter for fresh assessment, imposing cost for non-compliance.
The issue was addition of deemed dividend under search assessment. The tribunal held that without incriminating material, additions in completed assessments are unsustainable.
The issue was whether a long delay in filing appeals could be condoned. The tribunal held that absence of credible explanation bars condonation, leading to dismissal of appeals.
The issue was denial of capital gains exemption due to claim under wrong section. The tribunal held that a genuine claim cannot be rejected merely for citing an incorrect provision and remanded the case.
The issue was whether penalty for misreporting can be imposed without specifying the applicable clause. The tribunal held such penalty invalid and ordered its deletion.
The issue was whether reassessment notice issued without approval from the correct authority is valid. The tribunal held it invalid and quashed the assessment for lack of jurisdiction.
The issue was denial of FTC due to delayed filing of Form 67. ITAT held that delay is procedural and directed authorities to grant credit after verification.
The issue was whether penalty under Section 270A is valid without specifying the exact charge. ITAT held that absence of a specific limb of misreporting makes the penalty invalid.
The issue was denial of registration due to non-commencement of activities. ITAT held that proposed activities and initial steps like investment are sufficient and ordered reconsideration.
