The issue was whether jewellery found during search can be taxed despite CBDT limits. ITAT held that jewellery within prescribed limits cannot be treated as unexplained income.
The issue was denial of deduction due to delayed filing of Form 56F. ITAT held that delay is a procedural lapse and directed allowance of deduction.
The Tribunal held reassessment invalid as the alleged escaped income did not exceed ₹50 lakh required for extended limitation. It ruled that invoking extended time under Section 149 without satisfying this condition is illegal.
The tribunal held that penalty for non-appearance cannot be sustained when reasonable cause exists. Ignorance of proceedings and factual circumstances justified relief.
ITAT condoned an 820-day delay due to a bona fide jurisdictional mistake. It held that SBN deposits from members cannot be treated as unexplained when the source is properly explained.
The tribunal held that claiming TDS credit creates presumption of income in the assessee’s hands. The key takeaway is that TDS benefit must be explained or it becomes taxable.
The tribunal held that arbitrary estimation of agricultural income without supporting data is unsustainable. It ruled that additions cannot be made based on guesswork without evidence.
ITAT Bangalore condoned a 143-day delay caused by employee resignation, holding procedural lapses shouldnt deny justice. CIT(A)s order set aside; case restored for fresh adjudication on merits.
The tribunal held that disallowance based solely on third-party information without independent verification is unsustainable. It ruled that proper enquiry and evidence are essential before treating purchases as bogus.
The tribunal held that generation-based incentive linked to electricity output qualifies for deduction under Section 80-IA. It ruled that such incentives have a direct nexus with business operations.
