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.
The tribunal examined whether an appeal could be dismissed for non-compliance without considering the assessee’s explanation. It set aside the order and remanded the matter, directing the authority to decide the appeal afresh after granting a proper hearing.
The tribunal examined whether an appeal could be dismissed as time-barred without giving the assessee an opportunity to be heard. It held that denial of hearing violated principles of natural justice and remanded the matter for fresh adjudication.
ITAT ruled that jurisdiction to reopen assessment arises only when a valid notice is issued to a living person or legal representative. Since the notice was issued to a deceased assessee, the reassessment order was declared illegal.
