The Tribunal deleted a ₹96.23 crore disallowance after finding that the liabilities crystallised during the relevant assessment year. It ruled that the Assessing Officer failed to prove that the liabilities had arisen and become ascertainable in earlier years.
The Tribunal held that a penalty notice must clearly state the specific limb of Section 270A being invoked. Absence of such specification was held fatal to the penalty proceedings.
The Tribunal held that generalized investigation reports cannot substitute for concrete evidence against an assessee. Since the transactions were supported by documents and no direct evidence of undisclosed income existed, the addition was deleted.
ITAT Mumbai condoned a 524-day delay in filing an appeal after finding that the assessee remained unaware of the assessment order due to communications being routed through his tax consultant. The matter was remanded for adjudication on merits.
The Tribunal held that long-term capital losses can be carried forward even when long-term capital gains are exempt under the India–Mauritius DTAA. Exempt gains do not enter the computation of total income and therefore cannot absorb the losses.
The Mumbai ITAT held that reassessment initiated beyond three years was invalid because the alleged escaped income was only ₹5 lakh, far below the ₹50 lakh requirement under Section 149(1)(b). As a result, the reassessment and consequential assessment order were quashed.
Periodic or annual fees paid to a sports governing body to sustain annual league participation rights qualify as operational revenue expenses, not capital investments. Hospitality, travel, and boarding expenses incurred on celebrities and VIPs were fully deductible if they were used strategically to amplify brand visibility, ticket distribution, and corporate sponsorships.
The Tribunal held that once immunity under Section 270AA was granted and the assessee accepted the assessment without appeal, the Assessing Officer could not later alter the assessment through Section 154 rectification. The ruling reinforces the finality and certainty intended by the immunity scheme.
State Bank of India Vs ACIT (ITAT Mumbai) The Mumbai Bench of the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal decided cross-appeals filed by a public sector bank and the Revenue for Assessment Year 2010-11. The case involved a large number of recurring banking-taxation issues including pension provisions, depreciation on securities, bad debts, section 14A disallowance, taxation of […]
The Mumbai ITAT found that the assessment order was passed without granting a reasonable opportunity to the assessee to furnish complete details or avail a hearing. The matter was remanded for fresh adjudication.
