The Court condoned a 179-day delay and admitted the appeal on questions involving Section 263. It will examine whether the Tribunal erred in quashing revisionary action.
The Tribunal held that no double deduction was claimed as the provision was already added back in computation. The addition was deleted for being based on incorrect facts.
The Tribunal held that rejecting the appeal solely due to delay without examining merits was not justified. It condoned the delay and remanded the matter for fresh adjudication.
The Court held that a summary in Form DRC-01 cannot substitute a proper show cause notice under Section 73. Proceedings initiated without a valid SCN were set aside as contrary to law.
The Court allowed the assessee to seek restoration even after delay in filing revocation application. It held that compliance with pending returns and payment of dues enables reconsideration under Rule 22(4).
Tribunal directed allocation of common head-office expenses (and common income) to eligible industrial undertakings when computing deductions under sections 10B and 80-IB, following prior coordinate-bench rulings; AO must apply the earlier directions on remand. Key takeaway: common corporate overheads and income were to be apportioned to units for deduction-computation as previously directed.
The issue involved expiring tenures of tribunal members and lack of replacement mechanisms. The Supreme Court permitted a uniform extension framework up to September 2026. The decision aims to maintain operational tribunals pending legislative reform.
The tribunal set aside the assessment after finding that faceless assessment proceedings were initiated before the scheme was formally notified, rendering the assumption of jurisdiction invalid.
The High Court held that ITC claims for financial years 2017-18 to 2020-21 remain valid if returns were filed before 30 November 2021 under the amended Section 16(5).
The ITAT Mumbai held that adjustments under Section 143(1) cannot be made without issuing prior intimation to the taxpayer. As CPC failed to provide such notice or reasons, the adjustment and resulting demand were set aside.
