Tribunal rules that Section 54 deduction applies to property purchased outside India before the 2015 amendment, overturning CIT(A) decision.
The Tribunal held that the AO cannot expand a limited scrutiny into full scrutiny without written approval from the Principal CIT. Additions under Sections 2(22)(e) and 69A were struck down, reaffirming that CBDT instructions are mandatory.
The Tribunal held that freight amounts collected and passed on to airlines are mere reimbursements, not income. Only the assessee’s service margin is taxable.
The Tribunal found that even a belated return filed in response to a Section 148 notice remains a valid return requiring a 143(2) notice. Because this mandatory notice was never issued, the reassessment order was declared illegal and set aside.
Tribunal held that denying opportunity to submit evidence amounts to potential miscarriage of justice. CIT(A) directed to reconsider income addition after evaluating all documents.
ITAT held that appeals filed with incorrect jurisdiction cannot be heard. All four appeals dismissed, but assessee allowed to refile before correct bench.
ITAT ruled that Section 201 proceedings initiated beyond four years are legally untenable. Since the 201(1) order for AY 2016-17 was issued after the limitation period, the entire TDS demand was deleted. Tribunal held that date of knowledge is irrelevant for limitation.
Tribunal ruled Section 54F exemption is not available when the assessee owns multiple independent residential units, each with a separate kitchen. Deduction on the JDA property was disallowed.
ITAT held that sending hearing notices to a wrong email ID violated natural justice. The ex-parte order was set aside, and the matter remitted for fresh adjudication.
The Tribunal emphasized that even pending SLPs cannot override the statutory 10-year limitation for assessments. Revenue’s attempt to reopen AY 2010-11 under Section 153A was rejected, upholding the CIT(A)’s quashing of the order.
