The Tribunal ruled that unexplained investment additions based solely on a DVO report are invalid when books are not rejected and the report is not confronted to the assessee. The matter was remanded for fresh verification following natural justice.
The Tribunal held that a bona fide mistake in claiming deduction under an incorrect section should not bar relief. The matter was remanded to verify eligibility under section 35(1)(ii).
Where capital subsidy was not received in the relevant year and no addition followed, reopening lacked basis. Mechanical reliance on audit objections was held unlawful.
The Tribunal upheld additions in search assessments where seized material and settled precedent supported the Revenue’s case. The ruling clarifies that group-level incriminating evidence can justify section 153A additions.
The issue was whether a penalty can survive when the show cause notice fails to specify the exact charge. ITAT held that a vague notice violates law, making the entire penalty unsustainable.
The issue was whether TDS credit can be claimed by a person not named in the sale deed. ITAT held that TDS credit belongs only to the actual owners who executed the sale agreement.
The tribunal held that late filing of Form 10B is a procedural lapse and cannot defeat exemption under Section 11. If the audit report is available before assessment or rectification, exemption must be allowed.
The tribunal held that taxing the full sale consideration as short-term capital gain without allowing cost of acquisition is legally incorrect. Capital gains must be computed on net gains, not gross receipts.
The tribunal held that estimating commission income at 1% without verifying the existence of a genuine Shroff business was legally unsustainable. The matter was remanded for fresh examination by the Assessing Officer.
Where funds were merely routed through the assessee’s bank account, the tribunal ruled that only commission income is taxable. The earlier 2% estimation was reduced to 1.5% as more reasonable.
