Tribunal held that natural justice was violated when notices were sent only by email despite explicit instructions otherwise. Appeals were restored with costs, and the Assessing Officer must reconsider the case after allowing additional evidence.
The assessee’s capital-gain computation and share-transaction trail matched disclosed data. ITAT held the AO’s conclusion to be unsupported and dismissed Revenue’s appeal.
The Tribunal held that a short-term loan received from a sister concern cannot be treated as deemed dividend under section 2(22)(e). The loan was for business purposes, not for shareholder benefit. Key takeaway: transactions between sister concerns do not automatically attract dividend treatment even if there is common shareholding.
The Tribunal allowed the appeal partly due to the assessee’s 60% handicap, emphasizing that delay in filing was not deliberate. The case was remanded for merit-based adjudication, ensuring fairness. Key takeaway: disabilities and procedural lapses can justify condoning appeal delays.
The Tribunal directed the AO to verify conditions for exemption of receipts from tribal-area schools, confirming the Trust’s eligibility. The ruling reinforces that factual verification cannot override established charitable purposes and exemptions.
ITAT held that the reassessment notice issued after the assessee’s death raised jurisdictional issues. Legal grounds like issuance to a deceased must be adjudicated before proceeding with assessments.
ITAT held that before treating high-value purchases as bogus, authorities must verify supplier’s GST status, ITC claims, and money trail. Key takeaway: Procedural diligence is required for large-scale disallowances.
ITAT Ahmedabad ruled that a notice under section 148 issued beyond the statutory period is invalid, quashing a ₹115 crore reassessment of a share-trading company. The Tribunal emphasized adherence to “surviving time” limits, making the reassessment void.
ITAT Ahmedabad held that a section 263 revision cannot proceed if the AO issuing section 148 notice lacks territorial jurisdiction, emphasizing the need to first decide jurisdictional validity.
ITAT held that absence of earlier evidence led to addition under section 68. Now, assessee allowed to submit all books, bank statements, and capital accounts, subject to compliance conditions.
