The issue involved eligibility of interest from employee loans. The tribunal ruled that such income is not directly linked to core credit activity. Therefore, it is taxable as income from other sources
The issue involved taxability of interest earned from statutory deposits. The tribunal held that such income is attributable to business activities and qualifies for deduction. This highlights the importance of statutory obligations in determining tax treatment.
The issue involved wrong filing of Form 10BB instead of 10B. The tribunal held that correction before processing cures the defect. This ensures that genuine claims are not denied on technical grounds.
The issue was whether Section 153C could apply when the assessees own premises were searched. The tribunal held that such a person is a searched person, making Section 153A applicable instead. Consequently, assessments under Section 153C were quashed for multiple years.
The issue concerned failure to follow tribunal remand directions on comparables. The ruling held that such non-compliance caused procedural irregularity, leading to exclusion of certain comparables and recomputation of ALP.
The issue was whether a fresh registration application can be rejected due to prior denial. ITAT held that earlier rejection does not bar reconsideration if conditions are fulfilled.
The tribunal addressed whether delay in filing appeals due to procedural difficulties justified condonation. It held that genuine hardship caused by PAN mismatch and filing issues constituted sufficient cause, allowing the appeal.
The Tribunal restored the penalty matter as the quantum addition was sent back to the AO. It held that penalty must follow the outcome of reassessment proceedings.
The tribunal ruled that rejection of Section 54F deduction was premature as the assessee later produced relevant documents. It directed reassessment to verify evidence and ensure proper hearing.
The tribunal reversed the CIT(A)’s decision for wrongly quashing assessment due to lack of notice under Section 143(2). It held that Section 263 proceedings are a continuation of original assessment.