The ruling found no liability to deduct TDS because individual payments to transferors were below the statutory threshold. Consequently, the fee and interest imposed under Section 234E were set aside.
ITAT Jaipur held that Urban Improvement Trust is a “State” within the meaning of Article 289(1) of the Constitution of India being an instrumentality of State within the meaning thereof. Hence, income is not chargeable to tax under the Income Tax Act.
ITAT Jaipur held that addition towards unaccounted commission based on seized digital sheet without corroborative evidence is not sustainable. Accordingly, addition is deleted and said ground raised by assessee is allowed.
The Tribunal held that dismissing an appeal without granting reasonable opportunity violates natural justice and restored the matter to the AO for fresh adjudication.
The Tribunal held that investment in agricultural land in a spouse’s name qualifies for deduction under Section 54B, following Rajasthan High Court precedent.
The Tribunal ruled that a Section 148 notice issued after six years from AY 2013–14 was invalid, quashing the reassessment and additions under Section 54F.
Tribunal found that the CIT(A) admitted new evidence without AO’s opportunity and remanded the case for re-examination of NRE deposit sources under Section 69.
Since the transactions in seized records were only notional mock trading entries and not unexplained cash credits, only brokerage income at 1% of transaction value was taxable.
ITAT Jaipur held that addition towards unsecured loan cannot be sustained since identity of lenders, creditworthiness of parties and genuineness of loan transaction duly proved. Accordingly, CIT(A) order upheld and appeal of revenue dismissed.
ITAT Jaipur held that denial to allow the business loss stating the requirement of books of accounts to be audited is not justifiable since turnover during relevant period didn’t exceed the prescribed limit for getting books of accounts audited.
