The case involved disallowance of business expenses where activity was minimal. ITAT held that existence of even limited business justified partial allowance and restricted disallowance to ₹1 lakh.
The issue involved restriction of TDS credit due to mismatch between Form 26AS and return. ITAT held that such adjustments require verification and cannot be made under Section 143(1).
ITAT Delhi held that granting of mandatory approval under section 153D of the Income Tax Act by Additional Commissioner of Income Tax in a mechanical manner and without due application of mind is an empty ritual. Thus, order held void-abinitio for want of valid approval u/s. 153D.
ITAT Delhi held that Advertisement, Marketing & Promotion expense [AMP expense] incurred by Make My Trip wholly and exclusively for the business is not capital in nature. Further, since AMP expense is not an international transaction, adjustment by TPO rightly deleted.
The Tribunal held that additions based on presumptions without evidence cannot be sustained fully. It reduced the addition on unexplained cash deposits from 10% to 5%, granting relief to the assessee.
The Tribunal held that exemption cannot be denied merely because the purchase agreement was unregistered. Substantial payment and possession were considered sufficient for claiming relief.
The Tribunal held that different floors of the same building constitute one residential house. Deduction under Section 54 cannot be denied on the ground of structural division.
The Tribunal addressed denial of leave encashment exemption restricted to ₹3 lakh. It held that the revised CBDT limit of ₹25 lakh applies, allowing full exemption within the threshold.
The case examined whether settlement of a corporate guarantee liability qualifies as business expenditure. The Tribunal held that the guarantee was given for business purposes and the resulting payment was allowable.
The ITAT held that the Assessing Officer wrongly compared dissimilar email marketing services to determine excess payment. The ruling clarifies that only comparable services can be used for arm’s length evaluation, leading to deletion of the addition.
