The issue was whether leave encashment exemption should be capped at ₹3 lakh or ₹25 lakh. ITAT held that the enhanced ₹25 lakh limit applies, making the entire ₹13.12 lakh fully exempt.
The Tribunal dismissed the appeals as time-barred since no application for condonation of delay was filed despite repeated opportunities. In the absence of any explanation, the appeals were held not maintainable.
The tribunal held that delay in filing Form 10BB is only a procedural lapse and not a substantive bar to exemption. Where the audit report was available before processing, denial of section 11 exemption was unsustainable.
The Tribunal held that excess stock found during survey, when arising from regular business activity and disclosed in accounts, cannot be taxed as unexplained investment under Section 69B.
ITAT Jaipur held that assessment under section 153C of the Income Tax Act stands quashed due to lack of jurisdiction since there was no transfer of the case of the assessee from Delhi to Jaipur.
ITAT Jaipur held that claim on account of provision of future expense is allowable under section 37(1) of the Income Tax Act as per matching principle of accountancy. Accordingly, appeal is allowed.
Jaipur ITAT held that interest on a commercial property not used for business cannot be claimed as a business expense but is allowable under Section 24(b) from house property income.
ITAT Jaipur held that application for approval under section 80G inadvertently considered as application under section 12AB of the Income Tax Act is against principle of natural justice. Accordingly, matter restored back to CIT(E).
Jaipur Tribunal observed that the son had no independent income, and the purchase was made solely from the assessee’s funds. Consequently, restriction of exemption to 50% by the CIT(A) was set aside, confirming full Section 54F relief.
ITAT Jaipur held that withdrawing approval under section 10(23C)(vi) of the Income Tax Act not justified in absence of any corroborative evidence of personal benefit of trustees and misuse of funds. Accordingly, appeal allowed and registration u/s. 10(23C)(vi) restored.
