The Department argued that Section 292BC validated the approval despite alleged deficiencies, but the Tribunal rejected this contention. It held that the amendment could not apply to approvals granted before 1 April 2021. The ruling clarified that subsequent legislative changes could not cure defects in earlier approvals.
The Delhi ITAT held that Fees for Technical Services cannot be taxed under Article 22 of the India-Thailand DTAA merely because the treaty lacks a specific FTS clause. In the absence of a Permanent Establishment in India, such business income was held not taxable.
The ITAT Delhi held that Common Area Maintenance (CAM) charges are payments for maintenance services and not consideration for the use of premises. Accordingly, TDS on such payments is deductible under Section 194C and not Section 194-I.
The ITAT Delhi held that cash deposits during the demonetization period could not be treated as unexplained credits when they originated from duly recorded business sales accepted by the Revenue. The Tribunal upheld deletion of the addition under Section 68.
The ITAT Delhi held that free tickets, hospitality, conveyance, goods, and lodging expenses attracted Fringe Benefit Tax under the applicable provisions. However, it ruled that rejection of the assessee’s claims did not automatically justify penalty.
Delhi ITAT held that assessments under Section 153C were invalid where the satisfaction note for the non-searched person was recorded after 01.04.2021. The Tribunal ruled that Section 153C(3) barred such proceedings, rendering the assessments void.
ITAT Delhi set aside the assessment after finding that the assessees additional evidence had not been properly scrutinized by the tax authorities. The Tribunal emphasized adherence to principles of natural justice before sustaining additions.
The Tribunal held that delayed filing of Form 10-IC should not defeat the assessee’s substantive right to opt for the concessional tax regime under Section 115BAA. Since the intention to avail the lower tax rate was evident from the records, the benefit was allowed.
The ruling emphasized that CAM charges remain separate transactions irrespective of whether payments are made to the same landlord or a different entity. TDS under Section 194C was held to be correctly deducted.
The Tribunal held that interest under Section 244A must be computed up to the actual date of refund issuance. Restricting interest to the date of refund determination under Section 143(1) was found to be incorrect.
