The Tribunal ruled that adjournment based on pending comments from the Assessing Officer requires a definite timeline. It stressed orderly conduct and procedural fairness in handling multiple connected appeals.
ITAT Pune held that time limit of six months for filing an application u/s. 80G(5) of the Income Tax Act applies only to trusts which have not started charitable activities and not to trust which has already started charitable activities before obtaining Provisional registration. Accordingly, application held to be valid and maintainable.
The ITAT held that Section 43B applies even if interest is capitalised to work-in-progress instead of claimed as revenue expenditure. The Assessing Officer was justified in reducing WIP for unpaid interest to a Scheduled Bank.
ITAT Mumbai held that even a small stock discrepancy can attract Section 69A if unexplained. Lack of supporting evidence led to confirmation of addition.
The Tribunal remanded the reassessment after the assessee sought another opportunity to explain the source of investment. The addition was set aside subject to payment of costs and fresh adjudication on merits.
ITAT held that scrap trading does not follow a fixed sales pattern and income declared under Section 44AD cannot be rejected on suspicion. Addition under Section 68 was deleted.
The Tribunal held that redevelopment involved transfer of the entire immovable property, entitling the assessee to indexed cost on the full asset. Restricting indexation to 22.5% land share was ruled unsustainable.
Section 54F Deduction Remanded as Tenants’ Affidavits Suggest Commercial Use of Properties, No Addition Without Corroborative Evidence: ITAT Deletes ₹50 Lakh On-Money Addition in Property Deal and Presumption Under Section 132(4A) Cannot Be Applied Against Assessee When Documents Seized from Third Party
ITAT Mumbai deleted the Section 68 addition on LTCG from listed shares, holding that documentary evidence, STT payment, and banking trail were not disproved by the Revenue.
The Tribunal held that payment for cement shortage during transport arose from contractual obligation and was compensatory in nature. As no statutory violation was established, deduction under Section 37(1) was allowed.
