Cash deposits made by assessee during the demonetization period were properly explained and recorded, therefore, addition made under section 69A of ₹17,16,000 and taxed under section 115BBE was not sustainable.
ITAT Pune ruled that a pending appeal does not prevent a CIT from exercising revisionary powers on unrelated issues that were not part of the original appeal.
The ITAT Mumbai ruled that an assessment order passed on an amalgamated company after authorities were informed is void, citing the Maruti Suzuki precedent.
The ITAT Ahmedabad quashed a reassessment notice, ruling that the Assessing Officer’s use of “either…or” language indicated a lack of proper application of mind.
The ITAT Pune ruled that interest under Section 234B on an updated return should be calculated only up to the date of filing the return, not the intimation date.
The ITAT Chennai ruled that a belated filing of Form 67 does not deny foreign tax credit (FTC). The Tribunal held the filing requirement to be directory, not mandatory.
The ITAT Ahmedabad set aside a reassessment order for Dalpat Baraiya, ruling that approval from the wrong authority invalidated the entire proceeding.
In DCIT vs. Motilal Oswal Securities Ltd., the ITAT Mumbai dismissed the revenue’s appeals, confirming that employee stock option (ESOP) costs and corporate social responsibility (CSR) donations can be claimed as deductions.
The ITAT Mumbai ruled that the 60% tax rate under Section 115BBE applies to unexplained cash deposits for AY 2017-18, setting aside a lower rate.
ITAT Mumbai quashes addition for unexplained investments on land purchases in Hirji Parbat Gada vs ITO, remanding the issue to the AO to consider the DVO report.
