Pune ITAT significantly reduced Section 14A disallowance, ruling that administrative expenses relating to a proprietary concern with no investments must be excluded from computation. ITAT applied a reasonable estimate of Rs.10 lakh after finding expenses like depreciation and property tax had no nexus with earning exempt income.
ITAT Bengaluru held that cancellation of charitable registration under Section 12AB(4) cannot operate retrospectively for years prior to AY 2022-23. The order of the PCIT (Central) cancelling the trust’s registration for earlier years was quashed as legally untenable.
The Kolkata ITAT deleted a Rs.31 crore unexplained cash credit addition under Section 68 on the sale of shares, ruling the AO mechanically relied on an investigation report without fresh evidence. The tribunal held that investments accepted by the Department in previous years and confirmed via an NCLT merger cannot be summarily taxed upon sale.
The Kolkata ITAT quashed the Section 263 revision, confirming that the Assessing Officer (AO) had specifically examined and accepted the ICDS adjustments during scrutiny. The tribunal held that when the AO conducts due inquiry and takes a plausible view, the assessment is neither erroneous nor prejudicial to the Revenue’s interest.
ITAT Chandigarh ruled that additional income offered by a taxpayer during a survey, derived from business-related discrepancies like excess cash or stock, must be taxed at normal business rates. The tribunal held that the punitive tax rate under Section 115BBE does not apply if the income is clearly established as business income and does not fall under the deemed income provisions (Sections 69 to 69D).
ITAT Chandigarh quashed an assessment order made under Section 143(3) for a pre-search year, holding that after a Section 132 search, the assessment must mandatorily proceed under Section 148 with proper Section 148B approval. The tribunal ruled that the Assessing Officer’s continuation of the scrutiny post-search was a jurisdictional error, making the assessment void ab initio.
The Tribunal held that the Assessing Officer rightly accepted excess stock and cash disclosed during survey as business income after enquiry. Section 115BBE was not applicable, and PCIT’s revision under Section 263 was invalid.
ITAT Chandigarh deleted a wrongful addition, condemning tax authorities’ misuse of authority for taxing income a consultant mistakenly declared. The ruling asserts that Income Tax Authorities must assist taxpayers in determining their correct income rather than penalize bona fide errors.
Tribunal held that cost-to-cost reimbursements for IT support services do not qualify as Fees for Included Services (FIS) under Article 12 of the India-US DTAA, as no technical knowledge was “made available” to the Indian affiliate.
The ITAT Ahmedabad sent back a case involving an addition of Rs.1.17 crore for unexplained cash deposits to the AO. The remand was necessary because the CIT(A) issued an ex-parte order without verifying the evidence submitted by the assessee.
