The ITAT Surat held that abnormal price rise in a penny stock and surrounding circumstances justified treating claimed LTCG as unexplained income under Section 68. The Tribunal found the transactions to be part of a pre-arranged accommodation entry scheme.
The ITAT Mumbai held that notional rent cannot be taxed under “Income from Other Sources” without evidence that such income was actually received or receivable. The Tribunal deleted additions relating to shared premises with group companies.
Transfer Pricing Officer (TPO) had wrongly recharacterised Boeing India Defense Private Limited as a full-risk service provider despite the Associated Enterprise (AE) assuming the entire contractual and operational risks relating to defence support services rendered to the Indian Air Force (IAF).
The Tribunal upheld disallowance of deduction under Section 80GGC after finding the political donation lacked genuineness. The ruling highlights that payments through banking channels alone cannot establish a valid deduction when surrounding facts indicate accommodation entries.
The Tribunal ruled that addition of alleged undisclosed income could not be sustained merely on the basis of WhatsApp chats without supporting enquiry or evidence. It held that the department failed to establish any actual transaction involving the assessee.
The Tribunal quashed the assessment after finding that crucial JSK Server data, screenshots, and investigation records were never provided to the assessee. The ruling reiterates that additions based on undisclosed evidence violate principles of natural justice.
ITAT Mumbai held that a company engaged in publishing platforms, software solutions, and product development could not be compared with a limited-risk captive ITES service provider. Exclusion of the comparable eliminated the transfer pricing adjustment.
Tribunal found the DRP’s order cryptic and lacking proper analysis on similarity of business activities between the assessee and selected comparables. Fresh examination was directed regarding comparability and ALP computation.
The ITAT Surat held that bank transactions reflected cheque discounting business activity and could not be fully treated as unexplained cash credits under Section 68. Only estimated commission income and profit were sustained.
Assessee argued that conclusions drawn from a 2005 survey on liaison offices could not be applied mechanically to later branch office structure. ITAT directed fresh examination of branch office’s actual functions and activities.
