The issue was whether unsecured loans from directors routed through a partnership firm could be treated as unexplained cash credits. The Tribunal held that once identity, creditworthiness, and genuineness are proved through books and bank records, section 68 addition cannot survive.
The Tribunal held that once a closing cash balance is disclosed and accepted in a prior year’s scrutiny assessment, it cannot be questioned as unexplained opening cash in a subsequent year.
The issue was whether reassessment could be initiated by a jurisdictional officer after faceless schemes became mandatory. The Tribunal held that notices issued outside the faceless mechanism lack jurisdiction and invalidate the reassessment.
The dispute concerned denial of property purchase cost where payments were made by a close relative. The Tribunal held that once source and utilization of funds are established, such payments must be allowed as cost of acquisition. Key takeaway
The case examined rejection of registration without affording a proper opportunity of being heard. The Tribunal ruled that deciding against the trust without confronting it on objections violates principles of natural justice. Key takeaway: procedural fairness is mandatory in section 12A proceedings.
Expenditure on tunnel-specific infrastructure was ruled not to give enduring benefit beyond the contract period. The ruling clarifies that longevity alone does not convert temporary project tools into capital assets.
The issue concerned treating business creditors as unexplained cash credits due to non-response to notices. The Tribunal held that corroborative balance sheets and ledger evidence warranted fresh verification, and remanded the matter to the AO.
The Tribunal ruled that penalty proceedings are consequential to assessment. When the assessment issue is pending before the High Court, penalty cannot be enforced.
The Tribunal held that issuing a Section 143(2) notice is compulsory once a return is filed under Section 148. Absence of such notice vitiates jurisdiction and nullifies the reassessment.
The Tribunal examined whether a creditor’s unilateral write-off automatically results in cessation of liability for the assessee. It held that such write-off requires factual verification and cannot, by itself, trigger addition under section 41(1).
