The Tribunal admitted additional evidence where TDS credit was denied because it appeared in a different assessment year’s Form 26AS. The matter was remanded to the Assessing Officer to verify documents and allow credit as per law.
The Tribunal restored the matter after holding that dismissal of the appeal without giving a chance to explain delay and cash deposits was not justified.
The ITAT held that reassessment is invalid where no addition is made on the sole ground for reopening, leading to the proceedings being quashed.
The Tribunal held that reassessment for AY 2015–16 was barred by limitation as the Section 148 notice was issued beyond the permissible period. It ruled that TOLA did not extend the time limit and the proceedings were void ab initio.
The Tribunal restored the matter after finding that the appellate authority failed to decide the assessees grounds on merits. The case was remanded for fresh adjudication with directions to consider all documents.
The Tribunal held that capital gains must be computed using the final stamp value determined after litigation, not an earlier inflated valuation, and directed deletion of the resulting addition.
The Tribunal held that advance tax cannot be treated as delayed when the amount is debited from the taxpayer’s bank account on the due date. Interest under Section 234C was quashed as the delay in challan generation was beyond the assessee’s control.
The Tribunal held that deduction under Section 80JJAA cannot be denied merely because Form 10DA was accepted late when it was uploaded before the due date and available on record before return processing. The ruling treats delayed acceptance as a procedural lapse, not a substantive default.
The Tribunal held that the Assessing Officer cannot apply FMV for capital gains and book value for business income on the same converted asset. Section 45(2) mandates consistent valuation to prevent artificial inflation of taxable income.
The Tribunal upheld disallowance of political donation deductions where the assessee failed to prove genuineness and the transactions were linked to suspected accommodation entries. The ruling reinforces the burden on taxpayers to substantiate claims under section 80GGC with credible evidence.
