The issue involved taxing a marginal valuation difference on property purchase. The Tribunal deleted the addition as the variation was below the statutory tolerance threshold. The decision confirms that minor deviations alone cannot be treated as taxable income.
The case examined whether disallowance under section 14A could be made when no expenditure relating to exempt income was claimed. The Tribunal held that unclaimed expenses cannot be disallowed. The ruling reinforces that section 14A applies only to deductions actually claimed.
The dispute involved taxability of large cash deposits made during demonetisation. The appellate authority granted relief for deposits in regular notes while sustaining the balance as unexplained income. The Tribunal upheld this approach, finding it consistent with law and facts.
The issue was whether a late return under section 139(4) bars the concessional 22% tax regime. The Tribunal held that timely filing of Form 10IC is sufficient and the benefit cannot be denied on technical grounds.
The Tribunal held that selecting an incorrect clause in Form 10AB is a technical defect. Charitable registration cannot be denied when all substantive requirements are satisfied.
The Tribunal held that the six-month timeline under section 12A(1)(ac)(iii) does not apply to existing trusts. Final registration cannot be rejected merely on alleged delay.
The Tribunal held that additions treating shooting location receipts as house property income were premature. Authorities were directed to re-examine the claim after considering all relevant documents.
The dispute examined whether satellite transponder charges paid to a foreign entity constituted royalty requiring tax deduction at source. The Tribunal held that such payments were not royalty under the India–UK DTAA, as there was no use of a secret process or transfer of rights. Consequently, no withholding tax obligation arose under section 195
The Tribunal held that rights received under a joint development agreement are not free but exchanged for land. Indexed cost must therefore be allowed while computing capital gains.
The Tribunal ruled that once additional evidence is admitted, the appellate authority must adjudicate it on merits. Absence of a speaking order required the matter to be remanded for fresh consideration.
