The Tribunal set aside rejection of charitable registration where activities were not examined on merits. The case underscores that authorities must assess genuineness of activities before denying registration.
The Tribunal held that remanding an assessment under the amended section 251(1)(a) is legally valid. The key takeaway is that appellate remand powers now have clear statutory backing.
The Tribunal held that cash deposits could not be fully treated as undisclosed when income was declared under section 44AD. The key takeaway is acceptance of presumptive business income.
The Tribunal found that the appellate order was passed ex parte without a reasoned decision. The case was remanded for fresh adjudication after granting proper hearing.
The Tribunal held that remanding an assessment under the amended section 251(1)(a) is legally valid. The key takeaway is that appellate remand powers now have clear statutory backing.
The Tribunal held that while interest on enhanced compensation was taxable as per settled law, the exemption claim for land compensation required verification. The matter was remanded for fresh examination.
Cash deposits followed by regular transfers to the telecom operator established a clear business cycle. The ruling confirms that explained business receipts cannot be treated as unexplained cash.
The Tribunal held that a Section 148A(d) order passed by a jurisdictional AO after the faceless notification is without legal authority. Any reassessment founded on such an order is void for want of jurisdiction.
The Tribunal ruled that post-notification reassessment notices must strictly follow the faceless assessment framework. Issuance by a jurisdictional AO renders the notice without authority and the reassessment unsustainable.
ITAT ruled that unverified electronic records recovered from a third party do not constitute reliable evidence of cash payments. Additions based solely on such data were deleted.
