The ITAT held that a public charitable trust could not be taxed at the Maximum Marginal Rate under Section 167B. It directed taxation at normal rates and held that no tax was payable as the income was below the basic exemption limit.
ITAT Ahmedabad held that cash deposits cannot be treated as unexplained merely because they were made in old denomination notes during demonetisation. The Tribunal remanded the matter to verify whether the deposits represented genuine business sales.
The Gujarat High Court directed release of the petitioner’s attached bank accounts after the State admitted that no findings under Form DRC-18 had been recorded. The Court, however, allowed the authorities to pursue recovery from the company or its responsible directors in accordance with law.
The ITAT Pune held that compensation received under an Early Retirement Scheme could not be taxed as profits in lieu of salary under Section 17(3)(i). Following earlier judicial precedents, it directed deletion of the addition.
The ITAT held that penalty proceedings under Section 270A were invalid because the Assessing Officer did not specify the applicable statutory charge under the provision. It ruled that such omission violated the principles of natural justice and quashed the penalty.
The NCLT Delhi dispensed with meetings of secured and unsecured creditors after finding that the proposed demerger involved no compromise with creditors and did not adversely affect their rights. Only the resulting company’s equity shareholders were directed to convene a meeting.
CESTAT Allahabad held that interest under Section 11BB becomes payable after three months from the date of the refund application, not from the appellate order granting refund. The Tribunal awarded statutory interest on the delayed refund while rejecting the claim for interest on interest.
The Calcutta High Court held that the Income Tax Department cannot deny Form 5 under the Vivad Se Vishwas Scheme due to a technical portal error that wrongly mapped the taxpayer’s payment. It directed correction of the error and issuance of Form 5 after verification of the challan.
The Calcutta High Court held that KMC’s retrospective enhancement of Annual Valuation and consequential property tax demands lacked statutory authority and violated mandatory procedural safeguards. The Court restored the earlier valuation and permitted fresh assessment only in accordance with the KMC Act.
The Delhi ITAT held that cash deposits sourced from recorded cash sales cannot be treated as unexplained credits once the sales and books of account are accepted. The Tribunal deleted the Section 68 addition as it resulted in double taxation of the same income.
