ITAT deleted the addition after holding that a retracted statement alone could not justify it where documentary evidence supporting purchases remained uncontroverted.
Provisions that were typically restricted or viewed as contingent become fully deductible business expenses the moment they were quantified, crystallized, and physically paid out before the tax return filing deadline. Revenue could not arbitrarily disallow a flat percentage of direct operational or employee welfare expenses based on general suspicion.
ITAT remanded the matter after holding that the CIT(A) passed a non-speaking order without giving reasons or properly considering the assessee’s submissions.
Receipts earned by a German resident individual from rendering managerial, consultancy and business development services outside India, based on personal expertise and independent professional skill, constituted independent professional services under Article 14 of the India–Germany DTAA and were not taxable in India in the absence of a fixed base or the prescribed period of stay in India
The Tribunal restricted the Section 14A disallowance to exempt income and deleted additions relating to bad debts, tea and coffee expenses, and hotel accommodation after finding the statutory requirements for disallowance were not met.
The ITAT held that the CPC could not make adjustments under Section 143(1) without first issuing the mandatory intimation to the assessee. The Revenue’s appeals were dismissed as the statutory procedure had not been followed.
The ITAT Mumbai held that Fees for Technical Services were taxable at 10% under section 115A(1)(b) since the RBI’s automatic approval mechanism satisfied the statutory requirements. The Tribunal ruled that the 15% DTAA rate could not be applied where domestic law provided a more beneficial rate.
ITAT Mumbai held that the CPC could not withdraw an already allowed Section 10AA deduction through rectification without recording reasons. The Tribunal restored the deduction after finding no material justifying the action.
The ITAT Mumbai held that penalty under Section 270A cannot be sustained where the show cause notice and assessment order fail to specify whether the allegation is under-reporting or misreporting of income. The Tribunal upheld deletion of the penalty after finding the notice lacked a definite charge.
The ITAT held that a transfer pricing adjustment under Section 80-IA(10) cannot be sustained without proving the statutory conditions, including close connection, arranged business transactions, and more than ordinary profits. The Tribunal deleted the adjustment for lack of foundational evidence.
