The Tribunal ruled that non-deduction of tax pursuant to subsisting High Court directions cannot attract liability under Sections 201(1) and 201(1A). The key takeaway is that employers cannot be penalized for obeying judicial mandates.
ITAT Ahmedabad held that opening balances and share application money converted into loans from earlier years fall outside the scope of Section 68 for the relevant assessment year. The Tribunal deleted the entire addition after finding factual and legal infirmities in the assessment.
ITAT Ahmedabad held that a bank could not be treated as an assessee in default for non-deduction of TDS on LFC payments when it acted in compliance with binding interim directions of the Madras High Court. The Tribunal deleted demands raised under Sections 201(1) and 201(1A).
ITAT Ahmedabad held that a protective addition cannot be deleted merely because a substantive addition has been confirmed at the first appellate stage if the substantive addition is still under challenge. The ruling emphasizes that protective additions may continue until final adjudication.
The Ahmedabad ITAT held that adjustments under Section 143(1)(a) cannot be sustained without evidence of prior intimation to the assessee. The appeal was allowed as the Revenue failed to produce proof of notice.
The ITAT Ahmedabad held that ad hoc disallowance of business expenditure cannot be sustained when audited books are accepted and no specific defects or bogus expenses are identified. The Tribunal deleted the entire 10% estimated addition.
The Tribunal examined whether donations made as part of CSR obligations could qualify for deduction under Section 80G. It held that deduction cannot be denied merely because the payment was made towards CSR, subject to fulfillment of Section 80G conditions.
ITAT Ahmedabad held that transfer pricing authorities cannot assign a NIL arm’s length price when the assessee has demonstrated actual receipt of intra-group services through supporting evidence.
The Tribunal held that reopening under Section 147 cannot rest merely on information received from the Investigation Wing or Insight Portal. Since the Assessing Officer conducted no independent enquiry or verification, the reassessment proceedings were quashed.
ITAT held that execution and registration of a sale deed completes the transfer for capital gains purposes. Delayed receipt of sale consideration or dishonoured cheques cannot postpone taxability when the registered transfer remains valid.
