The Tribunal held that additions based on presumptions without evidence cannot be sustained fully. It reduced the addition on unexplained cash deposits from 10% to 5%, granting relief to the assessee.
The Tribunal held that exemption cannot be denied merely because the purchase agreement was unregistered. Substantial payment and possession were considered sufficient for claiming relief.
The Tribunal held that where registration is delayed, the stamp duty value on the agreement date must be considered. The ruling applies the beneficial proviso to Section 50C retrospectively.
The Tribunal held that different floors of the same building constitute one residential house. Deduction under Section 54 cannot be denied on the ground of structural division.
The tribunal held that gains from sale of shares did not fall under Article 14(4). It ruled that Article 14(6) applies, making gains taxable only in the country of residence. The decision clarifies DTAA interpretation.
The issue was penalty for misreporting on sale of land classified as capital asset. The Tribunal held the issue was debatable and deleted the penalty.
The dispute involved incorrect invocation of valuation provisions by the AO. The Tribunal ruled that using Section 142A instead of 55A vitiated the assessment.
The issue was rejection of trust registration treating activities as commercial. The Tribunal held activities were charitable and directed grant of registration under Section 12AB.
The Tribunal held that compensation under the BSNL VRS-2019 scheme qualifies as retrenchment compensation under Section 10(10B). It ruled that the entire amount is a capital receipt and fully exempt from tax.
The dispute involved unexplained cash deposits in bank accounts. The Tribunal ruled that deposits partly belonged to the principal, reducing the addition.
