The Bangalore ITAT held that an assessee claiming exemption based on Form 16 issued by the employer acted under a bona fide belief and cannot automatically be penalized for misreporting. The Tribunal deleted the ₹51.20 lakh penalty levied under Section 270A.
The Pune ITAT held that reassessment proceedings become void when approval under Section 151 is taken from the wrong authority. Since sanction was obtained from the PCIT instead of the PCCIT, the notice under Section 148 was quashed.
The Mumbai ITAT allowed deduction of professional fees paid for facilitating remittances relating to Iranian-origin imports affected by OFAC sanctions. The Tribunal held that the expenditure was incurred wholly and exclusively for business purposes.
The Tribunal ruled that CPC’s application of a 30% tax rate merely due to absence of turnover disclosure in the return form could not override the concessional rate provided by law.
Pune ITAT held that once the Assessing Officer accepted the explanation for cash deposits, reassessment could not continue on a completely new issue without issuing a fresh notice under Section 148.
Bangalore ITAT held that interest earned on statutory SLR and fluid resource deposits maintained under the Karnataka Co-operative Societies Act qualifies for deduction under Section 80P(2)(a)(i).
The Delhi High Court held that additional documents already referred to in a criminal complaint can be filed later under Section 311 Cr.P.C. The Court ruled that procedural defects should not obstruct substantive justice where no serious prejudice is caused.
The Delhi High Court held that shareholders of a foreign company cannot be taxed on the company’s rental income and capital gains merely because they hold all its shares. The Court reiterated that a company is a separate legal entity unless fraud or sham arrangements are proved.
ITAT Mumbai held that addition under Section 69A could not survive when based solely on a third-party statement without granting cross-examination. The Tribunal ruled that denial of cross-examination violated principles of natural justice.
The Mumbai ITAT held that assessment proceedings conducted in the name of a deceased person are legally void once the department is informed about the death. Both the assessment and appellate orders were quashed as nullities.
