The Tribunal ruled that cessation must be evidenced by a write-back or clear act in the books. Inferences or time lapse alone cannot trigger section 41(1).
The Tribunal held that once a regular assessment under section 143(3) is completed, earlier CPC adjustments under section 143(1) merge with it and lose independent existence.
The tribunal held that when the assessment order is remanded for de-novo adjudication, the very basis for penalty ceases to exist. Consequently, penalty proceedings under section 271(1)(c) become unsustainable.
The tribunal held that land registered in an individual’s name but fully paid by a society amounts to receipt of property without consideration. Such benefit is taxable as income under section 56(2)(vii).
The Tribunal ruled that once an appeal is rejected as time-barred, the appellate authority cannot adjudicate it on merits. A contradictory approach violates jurisdictional discipline and warrants remand.
Demonetisation cash deposits cannot be taxed merely on suspicion when supported by statutory VAT/Excise records, sales growth, and business expansion. Rule 46A(4) empowers CIT(A) to call for such evidence without triggering procedural violations.
The AO taxed entire bank credits despite accepting the assessee as an entry operator. ITAT ruled that fund rotations cannot be treated as unexplained once the nature of business is admitted.
The Tribunal held that pension paid by the US government is taxable only in the United States under the India–USA DTAA. The key takeaway is that beneficial treaty provisions prevail over Indian tax law.
The tribunal held that remuneration received by a professional partner qualifies as professional income. The key takeaway is that such receipts can be taxed under Section 44ADA.
The tribunal held that cash deposits of a petrol pump operator during demonetisation could not be fully treated as unexplained. Only a lump sum addition was sustained, recognizing the business nature of receipts.
