The ITAT Delhi held that although failure to file Form 10B disentitled the assessee from claiming exemption under Sections 11 and 12, the entire gross receipts could not be taxed where the expenditure was incurred for charitable purposes. The Tribunal upheld deduction of expenditure while denying the statutory exemption.
The Tribunal held that the ex gratia received under the BSNL Voluntary Retirement Scheme, 2019 qualified for exemption under Section 10(10B) and not Section 10(10C), following earlier Coordinate Bench decisions. It directed the Assessing Officer to allow the exemption after verification of the revised computation.
The ITAT Delhi held that the Revenue could not substitute the assessee’s consistent method of revenue recognition with the Percentage of Completion Method for only one assessment year. It deleted the profit estimation made on work-in-progress.
ITAT Ahmedabad held that the Transactional Net Margin Method (TNMM) remained the most appropriate method as there was no change in the assessee’s functional profile and earlier Tribunal decisions had consistently accepted it. The transfer pricing adjustment based on the internal Cost Plus Method was deleted.
The Gujarat High Court set aside the reassessment after finding that the Assessing Officer failed to provide specific reasons for treating bank credits as unexplained cash credits under Section 68. The matter was remanded for fresh adjudication.
The ITAT Delhi held that cash deposits representing recorded business sales could not be treated as unexplained under Section 68 when the books of account and trading results had been accepted. It deleted the addition relating to demonetisation cash deposits.
The ITAT Delhi held that an adjustment against excess contributions already made to an approved gratuity fund could not be disallowed under Section 40A(7). It also held that contributions to an approved gratuity fund are allowable under Section 40A(7)(b), resulting in deletion of the disallowance.
ITAT Mumbai held that the Assessing Officer had conducted detailed enquiries on depreciation claimed on concession rights during complete scrutiny and adopted a permissible view. Since the twin conditions under Section 263 were not satisfied, the revision order was quashed.
ITAT Chennai held that the reassessment notice issued on 02.04.2022 for AY 2015-16 was barred by limitation under Section 149, following the Supreme Court’s decisions. The reassessment proceedings were quashed without examining the merits of the additions.
The ITAT Mumbai held that Section 69C cannot be invoked where expenditure is duly recorded in the books and its source is fully explained. It deleted the addition relating to royalty, commission, and technical service payments.
