The Tribunal noted that the assessment proceedings were conducted during the COVID-19 pandemic and the assessee could not respond to certain notices. The case was restored for reconsideration after giving adequate opportunity.
ITAT Chandigarh upheld penalty under Section 271C as exemption under Section 10(5) applies only to travel within India, requiring TDS on foreign travel reimbursements.
The ITAT held that provision for dealer incentives under a sales promotion scheme was based on a scientific method and not a contingent liability. The disallowance made by the tax authorities was therefore deleted.
The Tribunal held that reassessment notices issued under Section 148 in the name of a company that had already amalgamated are invalid. The reassessment orders were quashed for lack of jurisdiction.
ITAT Delhi held that payments made by an employees’ welfare society to members, including death claims and retirement benefits, must be set off against taxable interest income before computing taxable income.
The tribunal ruled that reassessment proceedings for a period prior to the approval of an NCLT resolution plan cannot be sustained. It held that once the resolution plan is approved, tax demands relating to earlier periods cannot continue against the corporate debtor.
ITAT Mumbai held that reassessment initiated without approval from the correct authority under Section 151 is invalid. Since the reassessment itself was void, the revision order under Section 263 could not survive.
The Tribunal held that failure to electronically file Form 10 as required under Section 11(2) can lead to denial of income accumulation benefits. The case was remanded to allow the assessee to seek condonation under CBDT guidelines.
ITAT Mumbai held that long-term capital gains from share sales cannot be treated as unexplained cash credit when the assessee provides contract notes, demat records, and bank statements proving the transactions.
The Tribunal relied on official certificates confirming that the land was located beyond municipal limits and classified as agricultural. Since agricultural land is excluded from capital asset definition, the addition made under Section 56 was deleted.
