Expenses incurred for a proposed business project later abandoned were allowed as revenue expenditure. The Tribunal held that such costs remain deductible if incurred for business purposes.
The Tribunal ruled that failure to issue prior notice before making adjustments violates the mandatory provisions of Section 143(1)(a). Such procedural lapse renders the entire adjustment legally unsustainable.
The Tribunal held that adjustments made without issuing prior notice to the assessee violate the mandatory proviso to Section 143(1)(a). Such actions were declared legally unsustainable and liable to be deleted.
The Tribunal held that CPC cannot make adjustments without issuing prior notice under Section 143(1)(a). The disallowance of TDS credit was set aside for lack of jurisdiction.
The Tribunal held that the CIT(A) improperly admitted additional evidence without satisfying Rule 46A conditions or recording reasons. It emphasized that procedural compliance is mandatory and failure to follow it invalidates the relief granted.*
Addition under Section 68 could not be sustained where assessee has established the genuineness of a Non-banking financial company (NBFC) investor, and the AO failed to rebut such evidence or trace any money trail linking the assessee to the invested funds.
The Tribunal admitted a new legal ground and held that jurisdictional defects can be raised at any stage. It quashed the assessment as the initial notice itself was issued without authority.
The ruling clarifies that unauthenticated digital chats and screenshots cannot form the sole basis of tax additions without proper verification and legal compliance.
ITAT held that failure to record how seized material impacts taxable income invalidates proceedings. All assessments were quashed due to defective satisfaction note.
The case examined whether documents found during search can be automatically attributed to the assessee. The Tribunal ruled that ownership and connection must be established through evidence. The decision underscores limits of statutory presumptions under Section 292C.
