The issue was whether share capital could be added in a completed assessment without seized evidence. The Tribunal held that in an unabated year, additions are barred absent incriminating material.
The Tribunal ruled that denying Section 80P deduction is unjustified when the underlying interest income itself does not exist. Notional income cannot defeat statutory deductions.
This ruling clarifies that repayment of loan with interest, coupled with documentary proof, negates allegations of unexplained cash credit. Mere suspicion without defects in evidence cannot sustain an addition.
The Tribunal held that a reassessment notice issued to a company already struck off from the ROC is invalid. Since the entity had ceased to exist, the entire reassessment and assessment proceedings were quashed.
ITAT held that additions under Section 68 cannot be made for an unabated year unless incriminating material is found during search. Share premium additions based only on books and enquiries were rightly deleted.
The Tribunal held that inadvertent mistakes in filing Form 10AB cannot defeat a trust’s right to exemption. Registration was directed where objects and activities were never disputed.
Holding Section 54F to be a beneficial provision, the Tribunal applied settled judicial principles to allow exemption where substantive conditions were met, directing deletion of the capital gains addition.
The Tribunal held that share capital received from promoters cannot be treated as unexplained under section 68 without tangible evidence. Mere suspicion about source of funds or share premium is insufficient.
The Tribunal held that an unsigned notice under Section 148 is invalid and does not confer jurisdiction on the Assessing Officer. Consequently, the entire reassessment and additions were quashed as void ab initio.
Once the reassessment was quashed for jurisdictional and limitation defects, the Revenues appeal on merits became infructuous. The decision underscores the primacy of legal compliance in reassessment cases.
