The ITAT Gauhati ruled that relief under Section 89(1) cannot be denied solely because Form 10E was not filed before the due date. The Tribunal held that procedural lapses should not defeat substantive tax relief where eligibility is otherwise established.
ITAT dismissed the Revenues appeal because it did not contest the CIT(A)s ruling that the reassessment notice was legally invalid. Without challenging the jurisdictional defect, the appeal became infructuous.
The Tribunal held that share transactions relating to an earlier assessment year cannot be taxed in a subsequent year. Since the Revenue failed to link them to AY 2018-19, the addition was deleted.
The tribunal held that additions made solely on the basis of a statement recorded from an employee during survey proceedings are unsustainable in law. Statements by non-assessees cannot justify undisclosed income additions without independent corroboration.
The Tribunal ruled that completion of assessment after search, despite statutory abatement, is impermissible. Jurisdiction shifts exclusively to Section 153A proceedings.
The assessee claimed that cash deposits belonged to company debtors and past savings, which were not examined earlier. The Tribunal restored the matter to the AO for re-verification in the interest of justice.
The issue was whether unsecured loans could be treated as unexplained despite full documentation. The ITAT held that once loans are repaid and identity and genuineness are proved, section 68 cannot be invoked.
he assessee had already offered the same project income to tax in later years. The Tribunal held that taxing it again earlier would amount to double taxation. Key takeaway: timing disputes cannot justify taxing the same income twice.
The ITAT held that reassessment under Sections 147/148 is invalid if based solely on investigation reports, emphasizing the need for independent AO satisfaction.
The reassessment was framed by NFAC before faceless powers under section 151A were notified. The ITAT held the entire reassessment without jurisdiction and quashed both reopening and addition.
