The Tribunal held that no commission income can arise from circular transactions within group entities. Additions based on estimated commission for such intra-group sales were deleted.
Mumbai ITAT held that additions cannot be sustained merely due to Form 26AS mismatches. The Assessing Officer must verify whether income was already taxed to avoid double taxation.
Mumbai ITAT held that unexplained bank credits are fully taxable under Section 68 when beneficiaries of accommodation entries are not identified. Mere claim of acting as an entry operator does not limit addition to commission income.
ITAT Mumbai held that a block of assets does not cease if a new asset is added before 31 March. Consequently, no short-term capital gain under Section 50 can be levied.
The Tribunal ruled that additions under section 69 cannot exceed the amount actually invested during the relevant year. Where most payments were loan-funded, only the year-specific payment required examination.
The issue was whether stamp duty value as on registration could override actual consideration received earlier. The Tribunal held that section 50C is a machinery provision and cannot be applied mechanically to post-transfer market increases.
The Tribunal held that incorrect selection of a clause in Form 10AB is a curable clerical mistake. Registration applications cannot be rejected without examining the trust’s objects and activities on merits.
The Tribunal ruled that registration cannot be cancelled for non-maintenance of separate books when that allegation was never put to the assessee. Authorities must specify the exact clause of specified violation relied upon.
The Tribunal examined whether purchases could be treated as bogus solely on investigation inputs. It held that without independent verification or rebuttal of documentary evidence, the addition could not survive.
Purchase Date Doubts Not Enough to Deny LTCG Exemption: ITAT Mumbai held that transfer dates shown in share certificates satisfied the statutory holding requirement.
