The Tribunal ruled that workload and assessment proceedings alone cannot justify extraordinary delay in filing an appeal. The Revenues appeal was dismissed as time-barred due to lack of convincing explanation.
When an educational society was found to be substantially engaged in genuine charitable activities, its exemption could not be denied under Section 13(1)(b) simply because a few specific expenditures happened to benefit individuals from a particular religious community.
The Tribunal ruled that pursuing a rectification remedy before filing an appeal constituted sufficient cause for delay. The CIT(A)s dismissal of the appeal on limitation was therefore set aside.
The ITAT held that exemption under Section 10(23C)(vi) was available from AY 2018-19 because an earlier coordinate bench had already directed grant of approval. The Tribunal emphasized that judicial discipline required adherence to its previous ruling.
The Tribunal observed that CBDT instructions prohibit the AO from examining issues beyond the specific reason for limited scrutiny without proper approval. Additions relating to non-demonetisation cash deposits were therefore restricted.
Bangalore ITAT held that once ownership of agricultural land and cultivation activities are accepted, reasonable agricultural income cannot be rejected altogether. The Tribunal allowed relief for income from rubber plantation activities.
Bangalore ITAT held that unsigned loose sheets, scribblings, and rough jottings without corroborative evidence cannot form the sole basis for tax additions. The Tribunal deleted the protective additions linked to alleged capitation fee receipts.
The Tribunal ruled that surplus funds parked in banks by a co-operative credit society retain the character of business income when linked to member credit activities. Deduction under Section 80P(2)(a)(i) was therefore allowed.
Bangalore ITAT held that interest paid on a housing loan can be treated as part of the cost of acquisition where no deduction was claimed under house property income. The Tribunal directed the AO to allow indexed benefit on such interest expenditure.
Mumbai ITAT held that once receipts reflected in Form 26AS are assessed as taxable income, corresponding TDS credit cannot be denied on technical grounds. The AO was directed to verify records and grant due credit.
