ITAT Delhi held that consolidated approvals granted without application of mind under Section 153D were invalid. Consequently, the related assessment orders were declared void and quashed.
The Delhi ITAT held that receipts from sale and restricted use of standard cybersecurity software could not be taxed as Fees for Technical Services. The Tribunal relied on judicial precedents dealing with standardised technology offerings.
The Delhi ITAT held that reassessment notices issued beyond four years were invalid as the Assessing Officer failed to record the assessee’s alleged failure to make full and true disclosure. The addition relating to ₹13.10 crore share application money was consequently set aside.
ITAT Delhi held that reassessment cannot survive when additions are made on issues unrelated to the reasons recorded for reopening. The ruling reinforces that the scope of reassessment must remain confined to the original basis of jurisdiction.
The Delhi ITAT held that reassessment initiated beyond three years was invalid because the alleged escaped income represented by profit embedded in commodity transactions was only Rs. 4.27 lakh, far below the Rs. 50 lakh threshold under Section 149(1)(b).
ITAT Delhi confirmed disallowance of a Section 80GGC claim after relying on investigation findings that the political party operated as an accommodation entry provider. The ruling emphasizes substance over form in tax deduction claims.
The Tribunal held that cash deposits linked to recorded cash sales could not be taxed again under Section 68, as doing so would amount to impermissible double taxation.
The Tribunal held that notices issued after three years from the relevant assessment year require prior approval from the PCCIT. Approval from the PCIT in such cases renders the reassessment notice legally unsustainable.
The Tribunal ruled that an assessee who delayed filing an appeal while awaiting disposal of a Section 154 application had shown sufficient cause. The matter was restored to the CIT(A) for adjudication on merits.
ITAT Delhi remitted matters relating to sections 12AB and 80G after finding that the impugned orders did not clearly establish whether the assessee had filed replies or complied with notices. The cases were sent back for fresh adjudication in the interest of substantive justice.
