The ITAT Delhi held that cash deposits during the demonetization period could not be treated as unexplained credits when they originated from duly recorded business sales accepted by the Revenue. The Tribunal upheld deletion of the addition under Section 68.
ITAT Hyderabad held that dismissal of an appeal under section 249(4)(b) was unjustified where the assessee claimed that the receipts were exempt retirement benefits and no advance tax liability arose. The matter was remanded to the AO to verify the nature and taxability of the amounts reflected in Form 16.
The Tribunal ruled that premium rooms, higher tariffs, and specialized medical facilities cannot by themselves establish a profit motive. Charitable status must be tested on statutory criteria rather than perceptions of affordability or luxury.
The ITAT Delhi held that free tickets, hospitality, conveyance, goods, and lodging expenses attracted Fringe Benefit Tax under the applicable provisions. However, it ruled that rejection of the assessee’s claims did not automatically justify penalty.
Delhi ITAT held that assessments under Section 153C were invalid where the satisfaction note for the non-searched person was recorded after 01.04.2021. The Tribunal ruled that Section 153C(3) barred such proceedings, rendering the assessments void.
The Tribunal held that no interest disallowance under Rule 8D(2)(ii) could be made where the assessee’s interest-free funds substantially exceeded its investments. It reaffirmed that the Revenue must establish a direct nexus between borrowings and exempt-income investments.
The Tribunal found that none of the purchasers examined by the Department had admitted making cash payments to the assessee. In the absence of statements, receipts, diaries, or other incriminating material, the allegation of on-money remained unsubstantiated. The addition based on presumptions was therefore set aside.
The Tribunal found that the assessee had duly complied with statutory requirements by obtaining approval after modifying its objects. The CIT(E)’s finding of non-compliance was therefore contrary to the record. Renewal of registration was directed in the absence of any adverse findings on charitable activities.
The Tribunal held that an inadvertent mistake in Schedule 112A relating to the acquisition period of mutual fund units could be rectified under Section 154. Since the evidence showed that the assets were acquired before 31.01.2018, the Assessing Officer was directed to recompute the capital gains after verification.
ITAT Delhi set aside the assessment after finding that the assessees additional evidence had not been properly scrutinized by the tax authorities. The Tribunal emphasized adherence to principles of natural justice before sustaining additions.
