The issue was whether cash deposits from business sales could be treated as unexplained income under Section 68. ITAT held that recorded cash sales forming part of turnover cannot be taxed as unexplained credits.
The Tribunal held that booking a flat in an under-construction project qualifies as construction. Since possession was obtained within three years, full deduction under section 54 was allowed.
The Tribunal held that long-term capital gains cannot be treated as bogus based solely on investigation reports. In absence of independent inquiry or evidence, the addition was deleted.
The Tribunal dismissed the appeals as the tax effect was below the CBDT’s prescribed limit. The case was not examined on merits due to non-maintainability.
The ruling rejected re-characterization of share transactions as loans in absence of exceptional circumstances. Interest imputation on such transactions was deleted.
The Tribunal dismissed the appeal after finding that an identical appeal had already been filed and heard. The case was treated as duplicate and not examined on merits.
The Tribunal held reopening valid as tangible material showed undisclosed capital gains. It ruled that execution of a registered sale deed triggers tax liability even if consideration is disputed.
The Tribunal held that preference share investments cannot be treated as loans without supporting evidence. Following earlier decisions and High Court rulings, the transfer pricing adjustment was deleted.
Tribunal ruled that share transactions cannot be treated as loans without proof of exceptional circumstances. Notional interest addition on such re-characterisation was deleted.
The Tribunal examined whether delay in filing appeal was justified under section 249(3). It held that sufficient cause must be interpreted liberally to ensure justice. The key takeaway is that technical delays should not deny statutory appeal rights.
