The Supreme Court held that Article 226 jurisdiction over Armed Forces Tribunal orders is not barred. It ruled that judicial review by High Courts remains available despite the Tribunal’s appellate framework.
ITAT held that mere transfer of records cannot replace a valid transfer of jurisdiction under Section 127, rendering the assessment invalid.
The Court held that the Section 148 notice was invalid as it was issued by an Assessing Officer who no longer had jurisdiction.
ITAT Raipur held that penalty under Section 271D could not survive where the assessment order contained no satisfaction for initiating such proceedings. The penalty was quashed for lack of valid jurisdiction.
ITAT held that computer software is eligible for 60% depreciation and directed the AO only to verify its actual cost before computing the deduction.
ITAT Kolkata held that an assessment is invalid where the mandatory notice under Section 143(2) is not issued by the Assessing Officer having jurisdiction. The Tribunal quashed the assessment without examining the merits of the additions.
The Gujarat High Court upheld the Tribunal’s estimation of 6% on disputed purchases, holding that concurrent findings of fact warranted no interference. It dismissed the appeals for absence of any substantial question of law.
The Gujarat High Court held that the Assessing Officer relied only on information from the Maharashtra Sales Tax Department without conducting independent verification. It upheld the restriction of the addition to 5% and dismissed the Revenues appeal.
White Willow Vs ITO (ITAT Surat) The Income Tax Appellate Tribunal (ITAT), Surat allowed the assessee’s appeal against the order of the National Faceless Appeal Centre for Assessment Year 2014-15, which had upheld the addition of ₹1.50 crore under Section 68 on account of unsecured loans and the disallowance of interest expenditure of ₹7,18,581. The […]
ITAT deleted the TP adjustment, allowed 60% software depreciation, but upheld other disallowances, partly allowing the appeal.
