ITAT Chandigarh deletes ₹1.12 Cr addition for Northern Royalty Co. u/s 153C. Assessee’s revised profit (14-15%) was far higher than the 1.47% profit indicated by seized mining records. Arbitrary 18% NP rate rejected; consistency upheld. Revised return accepted.
ITAT Jaipur held that the Alumni Association cannot be said to be working for the benefit of its members only and the same will amount for the benefit of public at large. Accordingly, Alumni Association is for the benefit of public and eligible for registration. Thus, appeal is allowed.
ITAT Hyderabad held that once it is proved that amount is invested towards purchase of new residential property then deduction under section 54F of the Income Tax Act cannot be denied merely because property got registered beyond stipulated period.
ITAT Nagpur held that addition under section 43CA of the Income Tax Act unwarranted since difference between actual sale price and valuation as per DVO is within tolerance band of 10%. Accordingly, entire addition is directed to be deleted.
Tribunal granted substantial relief to Wadhwagroup Holdings by deleting tax disallowances aggregating ₹2,13,03,85,960. Tribunal dealt with issues relating to subleasing expenses, reversal of flat sales, project construction costs, interest expenditure, classification of common area maintenance (CAM) charges, and deemed rental income under the Income Tax Act, 1961, and ruled largely in favour of the assessee.
ITAT Jaipur held that addition under section 69A of the Income Tax Act towards unexplained money found during the course of search is liable to be deleted since assessee has discharged his onus to prove that the cash found is completely verifiable from the audited books of accounts.
ITAT Bangalore held that delay of 1265 days in filing of an appeal not condoned since negligence on part of the lawyer is not sufficient cause. Accordingly, appeal of the assessee dismissed by not condoning the delay.
The ITAT Hyderabad in ITO Vs. SR Peddi Estates India Pvt. Ltd. confirmed the deletion of a ₹4.39 crore addition made during reassessment. The Tribunal ruled that bank credits
The Tribunal held that capital gains did not arise in the relevant year because the JDA explicitly stated possession was deemed given only upon handing over the landowners’ built-up share. This means Section 45(1) cannot be invoked until actual possession or consideration is received, overriding the AO’s reliance on stamp duty valuation.
ITAT allows S. 80-IA deduction, ruling that the Form 10CCB filing delay is a procedural lapse that can’t deny a substantive claim, maintaining the judicial view post-Finance Act 2020.
