ITAT Mumbai held that reopening of assessment under Section 147 of the Income Tax Act is invalid if based on no new tangible material. The order clarified that such reopening is legally unsustainable and liable to be quashed.
ITAT Mumbai ruled that the PCIT rightly invoked revisional powers under Section 263 as the assessment order showed lack of proper inquiry, upholding the revision.
ITAT Mumbai allowed Gateway Distriparks Ltd. s appeal, holding that Section 14A disallowance must be restricted to investments that actually generated exempt income, following the prospective nature of the 2022 amendment. The Tribunal also condoned a significant delay based on the Supreme Courts substantial justice’ principle.
ITAT Mumbai held that long-term capital gains on sale of land are taxable in the year of transfer of possession and payment, even if the formal sale deed is executed later. The decision emphasizes the principle of substance over form under Section 2(47).
The ITAT Mumbai ruled in ACIT Vs Deluxe Recycling India Private Limited that the increase in the safe harbour limit from 5% to 10% for the difference between stamp duty value and actual consideration under Section 56(2)(x) is curative and retrospective. The Tribunal dismissed the Revenue’s appeal, deleting an addition, and restored the issues of depreciation and rent disallowance to the Assessing Officer for de novo verification.
Mumbai ITAT restored Discover Ekam Foundation’s Section 12AB registration matter to the CIT(E). Rejection, based on overseas fund use, will be re-adjudicated considering the trust’s revised Memorandum of Association.
ITAT Mumbai sends a lakh partner remuneration disallowance case back to AO for re-verification. The disallowance hinged on classifying property sale profit as capital gain.
The ITAT Mumbai set aside a reassessment for A.Y. 2017-18, ruling that the mandatory prior approval for a notice issued after three years must come from the PCCIT, not the PCIT. Citing Bombay HC precedents, the Tribunal deemed the order a legal nullity.
Tribunal held that CIT(A) deleted bad debt disallowance without verifying Section 36(2) compliance. Case remanded to AO for fresh adjudication after granting assessee fair opportunity.
The Mumbai ITAT restricted the disallowance for purchases from hawala parties to 25% of the bogus purchase amount, affirming the material was genuinely received and sold, despite fictitious invoices. The ruling relies on the Gujarat High Court’s precedent in Vijay Proteins.
