The dispute concerned whether reimbursements from an associated enterprise justified a transfer pricing adjustment using the profit split method. The Tribunal set aside the adjustment, directing a fresh FAR analysis before determining ALP.
Appeals were dismissed earlier as time-barred despite sustained efforts by the assessee through grievances. The Tribunal ruled that absence of negligence and bona fide conduct warranted condonation of long delay.
The Tribunal rejected estimated additions based on alleged circular trading due to lack of seized material or cash trail. The key takeaway is that suspicion and presumptions cannot replace evidence in search assessments.
ITAT Hyderabad held that notices under Section 148 issued on 01.04.2021 without following mandatory Section 148A procedures are invalid. The Tribunal quashed reassessment orders, emphasizing that procedural compliance is jurisdictional and essential.
The Tribunal held that earning income as a percentage of hospital turnover is commercial, not charitable. Section 80G approval was rightly denied for lack of genuine charitable application.
ITAT Mumbai held that TDS credit duly reflected in Form 26AS cannot be denied just because of some procedural lapse. Accordingly, order is set aside and the present appeal is allowed.
The Tribunal found that CIT(A) erred by linking the protective addition to another company. The assessment was remanded for correct identification of the beneficiary.
The Revenue sought to tax total on-money collected under section 69A. The ITAT ruled that on-money forms part of business receipts and must be assessed on a profit basis. The key takeaway is that taxation cannot ignore unaccounted expenses linked to such receipts.
ITAT Mumbai held that alleged bogus purchases cannot be disallowed when the assessee provides invoices, receipts, bank proofs, and GST compliance. The ruling confirms that suppliers’ non-filing alone is insufficient for disallowance.
The Revenue sought to reopen completed assessments under section 153A without fresh incriminating evidence. The Tribunal ruled that such additions are barred, following Kabul Chawla and Abhisar Buildwell.
