The Tribunal held that cash paid for a flat booking was explained through documented bank withdrawals. Unexplained investment addition was therefore deleted.
The Tribunal found that indexation was wrongly applied from a later year. It held that long-term capital gains must be computed from the first year the property was held.
The Tribunal held that demonetization-period cash deposits were supported by agricultural income evidence. The section 68 addition was deleted after accepting bills, vouchers, and landholding details.
The Tribunal held that a one-day delay in filing Form 10IE for an earlier year cannot defeat the assessee’s right to be taxed under the new regime. The assessee was directed to be taxed under Section 115BAC for AY 2023–24.
The Tribunal upheld the remand of an ex parte assessment where substantial bank deposits were not supported by any documentary evidence. It held that unsupported explanations cannot replace proof, and fresh verification by the Assessing Officer was necessary.
The Tribunal held that section 50C could not be applied where the sale consideration exceeded the value accepted by the stamp authority. A clerical error in departmental data could not justify substitution of sale value.
Holding in favour of the assessee, the Tribunal clarified that explained capital supported by documentary proof cannot be treated as unexplained income.
The Tribunal quashed reassessment proceedings after finding that the Assessing Officer already possessed complete information before issuing notice under section 148.
The ITAT held that gross bank credits cannot be treated as unexplained income where evidence shows the assessee merely facilitated transactions for a third party. Only a reasonable commission was directed to be taxed.
Addressing alleged cash discrepancies and debtor recoveries, the Tribunal held that such amounts form part of presumptive business receipts. Without books or adverse evidence, additions were unjustified.
