The issue was whether unsecured loan additions under section 68 could survive based solely on investigation reports and third-party statements. ITAT held that without independent enquiry and nexus to seized material, such additions are unsustainable.
The ITAT held that earning significant exempt dividend income necessarily involves indirect administrative expenses. In the absence of separate books, the AO rightly applied Rule 8D to compute disallowance.
The issue was whether penalties under sections 271D and 271E apply to cash dealings of a credit society with its members. ITAT held that genuine, audited member transactions supported by reasonable cause are protected under section 273B.
The issue was whether demonetisation-era deposits could be taxed despite admitted prior withdrawals. ITAT held that when withdrawals are genuine and the occasion is real, section 69A cannot be applied on presumptions.
The Tribunal held that no disallowance under Section 14A is warranted when exempt dividend arises incidentally from shares held as stock-in-trade in banking business. Applying Supreme Court precedents, it deleted the entire sustained disallowance, reaffirming that such income does not trigger Section 14A.
The AO taxed entire bank credits despite accepting the assessee as an entry operator. ITAT ruled that fund rotations cannot be treated as unexplained once the nature of business is admitted.
ITAT ruled that an allotment letter constitutes a valid agreement for section 56(2)(x) where consideration and binding terms are recorded. Stamp duty value on the allotment date, not the delayed registration date, must be applied.
ITAT remanded a ₹2.90 crore s.54F deduction case, allowing the assessee to furnish complete documentation and have the claim re-examined on merit.
ITAT acknowledged that ECB interest was fixed and consistently accepted in earlier years but adopted a marginally revised rate after the assessee’s voluntary settlement to close the dispute.
The Tribunal ruled that section 263 cannot be invoked merely because no addition was made during reassessment. When the AO conducts proper enquiries and accepts the explanation, revision fails for lack of error and prejudice.
