The issue was whether an assessment could survive when statutory notices were issued in the name of a deceased person. The Tribunal held such notices invalid and quashed the entire assessment.
ITAT Delhi held that final assessment order passed beyond the period of limitation for passing the order u/s 144C(13) r.w.s. 153 of the Income Tax Act. Accordingly, the same is barred by limitation and hence liable to be quashed.
ITAT Delhi held that for an unabated year, additions under section 153A require incriminating material. A seized loose sheet and retracted statements lacked corroboration, leading to deletion of the ₹100 crore addition.
The ITAT ruled that taxing section 28 interest as income from other sources through rectification was invalid. Where the issue is debatable and supported by binding precedent, section 154 cannot be invoked.
ITAT Delhi held that day of arrival should be excluded while computing number of stayed in India. Accordingly, the status of assessee is non-resident. Thus, the appeals of the assessee is allowed.
The Tribunal confirmed deletion of additions where the AO made no effort to verify consignees, transporters, or stock movement. Proper documentation and bank-received sale proceeds proved transaction genuineness.
The Tribunal examined whether lease rent and allied charges from an IT Park were business income or property income. It held that systematic commercial operation with integrated services warrants business income treatment.
The issue was whether the full value of alleged bogus purchases could be added to income. The Tribunal upheld that only the profit element embedded in such purchases is taxable, not the entire purchase value.
ITAT Delhi affirmed direction of CIT(A) to take average of prices reported in Kingsman Publication report and New York Board of Trade [NYBOT] price after converting FOB as per Comparable Uncontrolled Price [CUP] for purpose of computing ALP on issue of import sugar.
Emphasising strict compliance, the Tribunal ruled that assessments under section 153A without prior section 153D approval are invalid. Cross-objections became infructuous once Revenue appeals were dismissed.
