The issue involved taxation of capital gains based on a disputed land sale. The Tribunal held that once the sale deed was declared void, no capital gains could arise.
The tribunal held that TDS credit cannot be claimed by an agent when the underlying income belongs to farmers. It ruled that credit must align with the person offering the income to tax.
The issue was whether failure to deduct TDS due to court directions attracts default. The Tribunal held that compliance with binding interim orders prevents liability under Section 201.
The Tribunal held that reopening of assessment is invalid when reasons lack details like transaction nature, parties, and dates. It emphasized that vague information and absence of independent application of mind cannot justify reassessment. The ruling reinforces strict standards for valid reopening under tax law.
The Tribunal held that weighted deduction under Section 35(2AB) cannot exceed the amount certified by DSIR after the 2016 amendment, leading to disallowance of excess R&D claims.
The Tribunal supported the CIT(A)s decision to allow a new claim under Section 10A, noting that appellate proceedings are a continuation of assessment and aimed at determining correct tax liability.
The case involved additions for unexplained bank deposits where the assessee later produced authenticated NRE account evidence. ITAT remanded the matter, directing fresh consideration of documents and proper opportunity of hearing.
The issue was whether utilisation of earlier accumulated income qualifies for fresh exemption. The Tribunal held it amounts to double deduction as exemption was already claimed earlier.
The issue was whether incorrect tax treatment amounts to concealment. The Tribunal held that mere wrong classification in books does not attract penalty under Section 271(1)(c).
ITAT confirmed validity of reassessment based on cash deposit information. However, it reduced addition by applying peak credit theory due to withdrawal patterns
