The Tribunal validated reopening under Section 147 based on credible post-search information. Proper procedure under Section 148A was followed, making reassessment lawful.
The Tribunal held that member-based receipts may be exempt under the principle of mutuality. The matter was remanded to verify whether contributors and beneficiaries are identical.
The Tribunal found no evidence linking the appellant to receipt of proceeds of crime under PMLA. It set aside the attachment, holding that mere suspicion without proof cannot justify action.
The Tribunal confirmed liability of directors under Section 42 based on their role in managing the company. It found no error in holding them responsible. Key takeaway: managerial control establishes accountability.
The Tribunal upheld FERA violations involving unauthorized foreign exchange transfers through hawala channels. However, considering delay and circumstances, it reduced the penalty significantly.
The Tribunal upheld contravention but reduced penalties due to lack of justification for maximum fines. It emphasized proportionality in penalty determination. Key takeaway: penalty must be reasoned and proportionate.
The Tribunal upheld attachment, ruling that funds used in a conspiracy can qualify as proceeds of crime. It held that even layered investments linked to illegal activity are attachable under PMLA.
The ITAT held that issuing a demand notice and penalty along with a draft order makes it a final order. Non-compliance with Section 144C rendered the assessment invalid.
The Tribunal held that CIT(A) cannot make a fresh addition without issuing an enhancement notice. Cash redeposits from explained loan withdrawals were accepted as genuine.
The Tribunal held that transfer pricing adjustment cannot survive without a final assessment order post-DRP directions. Repeating such addition in a Section 263 order was held invalid.
