The Tribunal held that full disallowance of purchases was not justified where corresponding sales and quantitative stock records were accepted. ITAT sustained only estimated disallowance at 12.5% of disputed purchases.
ITAT Raipur held that additional evidence such as C-Forms cannot be relied upon by the appellate authority without giving the Assessing Officer an opportunity to examine it. The matter was remanded for fresh adjudication.
CESTAT Bangalore remanded the case after finding that the Department had granted exemption on similar rental income for subsequent periods. The Tribunal directed fresh examination due to inconsistent appellate findings.
CESTAT Chennai held that payment of Special Additional Duty is mandatory before claiming refund under Notification No. 102/2007. The Tribunal dismissed the importer’s challenge against SAD demand on imported silk fabrics.
ITAT Rajkot held that reassessment proceedings were invalid because the approving authority merely stated Yes, I am satisfied without independent application of mind. The Tribunal treated Section 151 approval as a mandatory procedural safeguard.
The Calcutta High Court held that deduction and deposit of TDS constituted acknowledgment of a loan transaction and jural relationship. The Court granted interim protection after finding the respondent’s denial of liability inconsistent with its stand before Income Tax authorities.
CESTAT Delhi held that amounts received by a recovery agent from a lender were taxable as service consideration since no documentary evidence of a joint venture existed. The Tribunal upheld service tax demand, interest, and penalty.
ITAT Delhi held that the Assessing Officer could not substitute the fair market value of shares without specifically rejecting the assessee’s DCF valuation report. The Tribunal deleted the Rs.4.14 crore addition made under Section 56(2)(vii)(b).
The Gujarat High Court held that only the income component embedded in alleged bogus purchases could be taxed instead of the entire purchase amount. The Court upheld the ITAT order restricting disallowance to 6% of disputed purchases linked to accommodation entries.
The Supreme Court refused to interfere with the Gujarat High Court ruling quashing reassessment proceedings where the assessee had disclosed all transactions in audited accounts and income tax returns. The Court left the question of law open.
