The Tribunal ruled that once the original notice itself is jurisdictionally invalid, later compliance with section 148A is irrelevant. Foundational defects cannot be remedied procedurally.
ITAT Chandigarh held that passing of final assessment order under section 153A of the Income Tax Act without issuing draft assessment orders under section 144C of the Income Tax Act is untenable. Accordingly, final assessment order u/s. 153A is quashed.
The Tribunal held that when sales are not disputed, the entire value of alleged bogus purchases cannot be added under section 69C. Only the embedded profit element is taxable.
The assessment was quashed because the mandatory notice under section 143(2) was issued by an officer lacking jurisdiction. The ruling confirms that jurisdiction must exist at the notice stage itself.
The Tribunal ruled that AMP expenses incurred by a brand-owning trader cannot be allocated to contract manufacturers without proof of obligation or agreement. Tax incentives enjoyed by related entities alone were held insufficient.
The Tribunal held that reassessment initiated by a jurisdictional officer after the faceless scheme became mandatory was invalid. The key takeaway is that failure to follow the faceless mechanism nullifies the entire reopening, regardless of merits.
The Tribunal held that when sales are accepted and purchases are unverifiable, only the embedded profit can be taxed. Full disallowance of purchases was found unsustainable.
ITAT held that dismissing a ground without reasons violates appellate duty. The 43B disallowance was remanded for fresh, reasoned adjudication.
The Tribunal held that profit estimation cannot rest on conjectures or lump-sum allegations. In absence of identified bogus purchases or factual basis, the entire addition was deleted.
Delhi ITAT held that a purchase-return mismatch does not constitute misreporting under section 270A(9). Immunity under section 270AA was granted, quashing the ₹10.69 lakh penalty.
