ITAT ruled that the CIT(A) wrongly treated the DVO’s report as binding and failed to independently scrutinize comparables, methodology, and objections. Key takeaway: the first appellate authority must evaluate the DVO’s report on merits and issue a speaking order.
The tribunal held that the State Electricity Board consumer tariff of ₹6.62/unit was the valid internal CUP for captive power transfer. Rejecting comparisons with generating companies, it ruled that no downward adjustment was required. The key takeaway is that actual SEB purchase rates can reliably determine market value for 80IA claims.
Tribunal upheld capital gains exemptions after finding that assessee had furnished proof of investments under sections 54F and 54EC. The ruling confirms that omission to consider evidence cannot justify denial of statutory relief.
Tribunal held that the AO had validly recorded dissatisfaction with the assessee’s 14A working and rightly invoked Rule 8D, confirming interest disallowance while remanding only the investment-averaging computation for Vireet-based recalculation.
ITAT Mumbai dismissed a tax appeal due to a 1,370-day delay, ruling that reliance on a tax consultant’s advice does not constitute sufficient cause for condonation. Case underscores strict adherence to limitation rules in tax proceedings.
The ITAT Mumbai held that Section 263 cannot be invoked when the Assessing Officer has taken a permissible view after inquiry. Revision order quashed, upholding reassessment.
The Tribunal held that VAT input credit shown only in the balance sheet cannot be taxed as income. It upheld deletion of VAT, commission, and notional interest additions, dismissing the revenue’s appeal.
The Tribunal found that the addition was inferential and lacked corroborative evidence of concealment. It concluded that penalty under section 271(1)(c) could not be sustained.
ITAT Mumbai held that addition based on ad hoc method not justifiable since assessee followed Percentage of Completion Method for revenue recognition adhering to guidance note on Accounting of Real Estate Transactions issued by ICAI. Accordingly, appeal of assessee allowed.
ITAT Mumbai ruled that non-resident investments sourced from foreign salary cannot be treated as unexplained income, deleting ₹2 crore addition under Section 69.
