ITAT Hyderabad held that assessment orders passed pursuant to earlier remand directions were barred by limitation under Section 153. The Tribunal set aside all consequential transfer pricing assessment orders dated 06.12.2024.
ITAT ruled that appellate powers under Section 251 are confined to assessment year under appeal. Directions to reopen completed assessments for another year were held beyond jurisdiction.
Delhi ITAT held that additions under Section 68 cannot be sustained merely on Investigation Wing reports without independent enquiry by the Assessing Officer. The Tribunal deleted additions relating to alleged bogus share capital.
Delhi ITAT held that a single consolidated satisfaction note covering multiple assessment years without identifying year-wise incriminating material is invalid under Section 153C. The Tribunal consequently quashed all related assessments.
Mumbai ITAT held that Section 56(2)(x) applies to purchase of MHADA leasehold property rights despite reliance on Section 50C rulings. However, the Tribunal directed the AO to obtain a DVO valuation before recomputing the addition.
Delhi ITAT held that unsecured loans already forfeited and offered to tax in a subsequent assessment year cannot again be taxed under Section 68 in the year of receipt. The Tribunal ruled that such action would result in impermissible double taxation.
Delhi ITAT held that notices issued under Sections 148A(b), 148A(d) and 148 without digital signatures are invalid in e-proceedings. The Tribunal quashed the entire reassessment as void ab initio.
Delhi ITAT held that before the amendment effective from 01.04.2015, exemption under Section 54 could be claimed for investment in more than one residential house. The Tribunal deleted the disallowance relating to the second property purchase.
Delhi ITAT restored ₹6.30 crore addition under Section 68 after finding that the Mauritius investor’s financial statements were unsigned and unauthenticated. The Tribunal held that incomplete documents cannot establish identity, creditworthiness or genuineness of transactions.
Delhi ITAT held that an Assessing Officer cannot make additions beyond the specific issues remanded by the Principal Commissioner under Section 263. Fresh additions unrelated to the revision directions were therefore rightly deleted.
