The issue was whether reassessment survives when no addition is made on the reasons recorded for reopening. The Tribunal held that such reopening is invalid, making the entire reassessment unsustainable.
The issue was whether an appeal can be dismissed outright for non-payment of advance tax. The Tribunal held that appellate authorities must first examine if advance tax was actually payable before rejecting the appeal.
The issue was whether revision is valid when political donations were not fully verified. The Tribunal held that failure to examine genuineness of donees justifies action under Section 263.
The case examined whether overseas income used for Indian property purchase is taxable. The Tribunal held that income earned and remitted from abroad cannot be treated as unexplained investment.
The case involved a Section 263 revision alleging failure to make additions after reopening. The Tribunal ruled that once the AO conducts enquiry and takes a conscious decision, revision is impermissible.
The case examined rejection of registration due to filing Form 10A instead of Form 10AB. The Tribunal held that clerical or procedural mistakes cannot defeat substantive entitlement of old trusts.
The dispute concerned taxability of gains from sale of land located outside municipal boundaries. The Tribunal ruled that such land remains agricultural in nature and is not chargeable to capital gains.
The Assessing Officer disallowed expenses merely alleging cash payments without evidence. The Tribunal ruled that expenses supported by records and banking transactions cannot be disallowed on presumptions.
The issue concerned reopening based on notices never validly served on the assessee. The Tribunal held that defective service of notices strikes at the root of jurisdiction and invalidates the reassessment.
Relying on precedents including rulings of the Delhi High Court, the Tribunal held that extrapolation across years is impermissible. The addition was struck down as being based on assumption rather than evidence.
