The ITAT ruled that the Assessing Officer wrongly adopted the stamp duty valuation despite contrary valuation material on record. The Tribunal directed fresh capital gain computation using the lower departmental valuation.
The ITAT held that stamp duty valuation could not be blindly adopted where the property was affected by BBMP demolition proceedings for unauthorized construction. The Tribunal accepted the actual purchase price as fair market value and deleted the addition.
The Tribunal ruled that a flat 15% profit estimation was excessive where all contract receipts were received through banking channels with TDS deductions. It directed recomputation of income at 7% of turnover.
The ITAT held that reassessment following a search was valid because statements recorded during search constituted fresh tangible material. The ruling distinguished reassessment from a mere “change of opinion.”
Delhi ITAT ruled that only unique solar days of employee presence, and not cumulative man-days, should be considered for determining Service PE under the India-US DTAA. Since the assessee’s employees stayed only 72 unique days in India, no PE existed and Section 44BB taxation was deleted.
ITAT Delhi held that Section 56(2)(x) could not be applied to property transactions relating to Assessment Year 2017-18 because the provision became effective only from AY 2018-19. The Tribunal deleted the addition made on the difference between stamp duty value and purchase consideration.
The ITAT Dehradun held that exemption under Section 54B cannot be denied merely for non-deposit in the Capital Gains Account Scheme when the assessee actually invested the sale proceeds in agricultural land within the statutory period. The ruling treats such non-deposit as a procedural lapse.
ITAT Delhi held that lawful TDS credit cannot be denied merely because the Assessing Officer overlooked an earlier rectification order under Section 154. The Tribunal directed grant of TDS credit and deletion of interest under Sections 234A and 234B.
Tribunal dismissed a Revenue appeal after finding that additions were made solely on basis of entries in a seized Excel file. It held that presumptions and unverified notings cannot replace concrete evidence.
The ITAT Delhi upheld deletion of a Rs.6 crore addition under Section 68 after finding that the share sale transactions were properly documented and routed through banking channels. The Tribunal held that the Assessing Officer failed to prove that the transactions represented unaccounted income.
