Pune ITAT held that penalty for under-reporting of income cannot survive where the Assessing Officer accepts the income declared in response to notice under Section 148 without any addition. The Tribunal deleted the entire penalty under Section 270A.
ITAT Mumbai held that prolonged non-payment of interest and repeated amendments to loan agreements justified benchmarking AE loans at a fixed 6.5% rate instead of floating LIBOR rates. The Tribunal also directed grant of credit for interest income already offered to tax suo motu.
Pune ITAT held that appellate authorities must adjudicate issues raised in appeals and cannot mechanically dismiss matters for non-compliance. The Tribunal restored the case for fresh consideration on merits.
Pune ITAT observed that reassessment proceedings initiated beyond three years may not be maintainable where the alleged escaped income is below ₹50 lakh. The matter was remanded for verification of jurisdictional facts and statutory notices.
The Tribunal held that deducting TDS only on part of the purchase price of immovable property was contrary to Section 194IA. TDS was required to be deducted on the full consideration of ₹4.81 crore.
ITAT Chandigarh ruled that general expenses could not be disallowed merely on suspicion or comparative increase without identifying defects in books or non-business expenditure. The Tribunal observed that the AO made the addition without proper examination of records.
ITAT Kolkata set aside the appellate order after observing inconsistencies between the findings of the CIT(A) and the assessment order. The Tribunal directed fresh adjudication with a reasoned speaking order and proper opportunity of hearing.
ITAT Raipur held that penalty proceedings initiated after unreasonable delay violated the statutory limitation prescribed under Section 275(1)(c). The Tribunal ruled that delayed penalty orders cannot survive once limitation expires.
ITAT Kolkata held that entire bogus purchases must be added under Section 69C where the supplier was proved to be a paper entity and no evidence of actual delivery of goods existed. The ruling reiterates that bank payments and invoices alone cannot establish genuineness.
ITAT Kolkata held that presumptive taxation under Section 44AD was wrongly invoked where the assessee’s turnover exceeded ₹2 crore. The Tribunal clarified that statutory turnover limits must be strictly satisfied before applying presumptive profit provisions.
