ITAT Mumbai dismissed Revenue’s appeal, confirming that Rs.14.11 crore surplus from perpetual sale of film rights, copyrights, and intellectual property to a third party should be taxed as Long Term Capital Gain (LTCG), not Business Income.
In the case of Deepak Jain v. Income Tax Department, the ITAT Delhi held that the BMA cannot be applied to foreign companies and bank accounts that ceased to exist before 1 July 2015, and that once proceedings were pursued under the IT Act rather than the BMA, the revenue may not shift to BMA under doctrine of election.
Tribunal held that when sales are accepted and supported by evidence, entire purchases cannot be disallowed. Only the profit element can be added, restricting disallowance to ₹8,075 as per Bombay High Court’s ruling in Mohammad Haji Adam & Co.
Bombay High Court dismisses Revenue’s appeal in PCIT vs N.N. Trading Corporation, holding no substantial question of law arises in dispute over gross profit estimation on bogus purchases.
ITAT Special Bench rules that may in Black Money Act Sec 43 means penalty is discretionary, not mandatory, requiring AO to consider assessee’s explanation before levy.
Bombay High Court quashes ITAT order that rectified its decision based on a subsequent Supreme Court ruling (Checkmate Services), affirming Sec 254(2) limits to mistakes apparent from record.
ITAT Mumbai sets aside CIT(E) order, holding Mohanji Bharat Welfare Foundation’s 80G registration application was timely, interpreting the six-month deadline from provisional approval expiry.
Bombay High Court sets aside NFAC’s ₹27.91 crore assessment on KMG Wires Pvt. Ltd., citing non-consideration of key evidence and AI-based reliance on non-existent case law.
Ujjawal Agarwal, accused of ineligible Input Tax Credit use under the Assam GST Act, secures regular bail from Gauhati High Court, which cited the duration of custody and procedural deficiencies in the arrest authorization.
CAAR Delhi held that Spectrum Analysers designed for 3GPP/LTE/5G NR telecom testing are specially designed for telecommunications and must be classified under Customs Tariff Item 9030 40 00. The ruling rejects departmental claims of general-purpose use and reaffirms the principle that a specific tariff entry prevails over a residuary one.
