ITAT restored a trust’s 80G approval rejection, directing the CIT(E) to accept the application based on a CBDT circular extending the filing deadline and allowing clause correction. The ITAT ruled that a charitable trust can correct an error in its 80G application and confirmed that the filing deadline was extended by a subsequent CBDT circular.
The ITAT Mumbai annulled a Section 148 reassessment notice for AY 2018-19, finding the sanction invalid because it was approved by the PCIT instead of the statutorily mandated PCCIT. The ruling strictly applies the Vodafone Idea doctrine, confirming that a jurisdictional defect in the sanctioning authority after three years is fatal to the entire proceeding.
The ITAT Mumbai restored a long-term capital gains case to the AO to freshly verify additional documents, including BMC certificates, submitted to substantiate a Rs.1.41 crore claim for cost of improvement on a property sale. The Tribunal acknowledged that BMC and architect records can decisively corroborate construction claims on old properties, overriding the prior technical rejection.
The Mumbai ITAT upheld the deletion of a disallowance for bad debts, confirming that deductions under Sections 36(1)(vii) and 36(1)(viia) are independent. The ruling followed the Supreme Court’s precedent, allowing the entire bad debt written off since no double deduction was claimed.
ITAT Mumbai held that transfer of an undertaking under a court-approved scheme cannot be characterised as a slum sale within the meaning of section 2(42C) hence provisions of section 50B not attracted.
ITAT Mumbai held that assessee is entitled for deduction under section 80IA(4) of the Income Tax Act on the basis of principle of consistency. Accordingly, appeal of revenue dismissed and order of CIT(A) upheld.
This ruling underscores the requirement for independent verification of uncorroborated search material, deleting additions made for unexplained cash under Section 69A and Capital Gains based on an employee’s diary. ITAT’s decision confirms that mere suspicion or rough personal notings, full of inconsistencies, cannot be the foundation for substantial tax demands.
The ITAT Mumbai held that the denial of the right to cross-examine a third party whose statement forms the foundation of a tax addition constitutes a serious violation of natural justice, citing the Supreme Court. The Tribunal set aside the 68 additions of 1.56 crore (across two years) and remanded the case to the AO for de novo assessment with mandatory opportunity for cross-examination.
The central issue was the correct depreciation rate for the HP Indigo Digital Press. ITAT Mumbai ruled the printer is an integral part of a computer system due to its reliance on interface and proprietary software, thus allowing the higher 60% depreciation rate. This ruling confirms that machines functionally dependent on a computer system qualify for the higher depreciation applicable to ‘computers’.
ITAT Mumbai ruled that a tax demand raised due to a typographical or inadvertent error, without any malafide intention, is invalid. Tribunal observed that assessee should not suffer unnecessary hardship for bona fide mistakes.
