The Tribunal ruled that delayed filing or incorrect disclosure in Form 67 does not automatically disentitle an assessee from claiming Foreign Tax Credit. Substantial justice must prevail over technical procedural defects.
Chennai ITAT held that reassessment notices issued after three years must comply strictly with Section 151(ii) approval requirements. Failure to obtain sanction from the proper authority vitiated the entire reassessment proceedings.
The Tribunal ruled that participation by a legal heir does not validate notices and assessment orders issued in the name of a deceased assessee. Proceedings must be initiated strictly under Section 159 against legal representatives.
The ITAT Ahmedabad held that reassessment under Section 147 was invalid because the Assessing Officer reopened the case for fictitious loan entries but made additions for alleged bogus LTCG from penny stock transactions. The Tribunal ruled that changing the basis of reopening is not permissible in law.
The Tribunal held that tax authorities cannot reject documentary evidence solely by labeling the explanation as an afterthought. Proper verification and rebuttal of evidence are necessary before sustaining additions under Section 69A.
ITAT Bangalore dismissed the Revenue’s appeal after holding that the Assessing Officer failed to provide adequate reasons for delayed filing. The Tribunal ruled that routine official workload could not justify condonation of delay.
ITAT Delhi held that penalty proceedings under Section 271(1)(c) should not be decided before disposal of the related quantum appeal. The matter was restored to the CIT(A) for fresh adjudication.
The Tribunal held that two sale deeds represented the same transaction because one was merely an amendment correcting a survey number error. It directed deletion of the duplicate addition made by the Assessing Officer.
ITAT Ahmedabad held that CPC cannot suo motu reclassify an apartment owners association as a co-operative society while processing returns under Section 143(1). The Tribunal deleted the Rs. 97,690 demand after finding the adjustment beyond the scope of prima facie processing.
ITAT Delhi held that an appeal dismissed ex-parte by NFAC should still be decided on merits under Section 250 of the Income Tax Act. The Tribunal restored the matter for fresh adjudication after granting one final opportunity to the assessee.
