In the absence of proper compliance with Section 65B and failure to establish a clear chain of custody, the digital evidence relied upon by the Revenue lacked legal admissibility and evidentiary value.
The Tribunal found inconsistency between payment date and share allotment date, raising doubts about the transaction. It held that these factual issues require verification. The matter was remanded to the AO for fresh examination.
Tribunal held that GST-based turnover differences cannot be taxed again when income was already recorded in prior years and notional interest recognized under IND-AS cannot be taxed unless it actually accrues.
The case examined whether share premium could be taxed without proof of unaccounted funds. The Tribunal held that Section 56(2)(viib) cannot be invoked without establishing such inflow, leading to deletion of the addition.
The case examined whether bank deposits could be taxed as unexplained credits. The Tribunal held that Section 68 applies only to entries in books of account, leading to deletion of the addition.
Tribunal held that technical handling income is covered under Article 8 of India–France DTAA. It ruled that such income arises from operation of aircraft in international traffic and is not taxable in India.
The Tribunal held that protective additions cannot be sustained without establishing the assessee as the actual beneficiary of cash credits. It upheld deletion where ownership was not proven.
ITAT Mumbai held that no TDS is liable to be deducted when payment is made for serving food in a restaurant in the normal course of running of the restaurant/café. Accordingly, appeal allowed to that extent.
ITAT Mumbai held that right to interest on refund is statutory right hence interest on delayed refunds arising from Direct Tax Vivad Se Vishwas [DTVSV] Act, 2020 is admissible. Accordingly, the appeals are allowed.
ITAT Mumbai held that the assessee is eligible for claiming Initial Public Offer i.e. [IPO] expenses proportionate to the shareholding in terms of clause (i) of section 48 of the Income Tax Act. Accordingly, the appeal is allowed to that extent.
