The issue involved levy of late fees on TDS returns processed before statutory amendment. The Tribunal held that absence of enabling provision made such levy invalid and unsustainable.
The Tribunal held that reopening an assessment on identical material already examined is invalid. It ruled that reassessment cannot be used to revisit concluded issues without fresh evidence.
ITAT held that penalty cannot be imposed where incorrect return was due to consultant’s misconduct. The ruling highlights that bona fide mistakes with voluntary tax payment negate penalty.
The Tribunal held that deduction claims should not be rejected for technical non-compliance. It emphasized that substantive provisions prevail over procedural requirements.
ITAT held that interest earned on bank deposits is taxable and not covered by the principle of mutuality. The ruling confirms that dealings with third parties break mutuality protection.
The Tribunal ruled that even temporary withdrawals by a shareholder can trigger deemed dividend under Section 2(22)(e). It held that duration or repayment does not negate taxability.
The Tribunal invalidated reassessment proceedings since the Section 148 notice was issued after 01.04.2021, making it time-barred. The ruling reinforces strict limitation compliance for reopening cases.
The Tribunal held that addition of entire cash deposits without proper verification was not justified. The matter was remanded for fresh examination with an opportunity to substantiate business transactions.
The issue was whether compensation under BSNL VRS is taxable or fully exempt. The Tribunal held that the scheme effectively amounts to retrenchment, making the compensation exempt under Section 10(10B).
ITAT Pune held that reopening of assessment under section 148 of the Income Tax Act based on audit objection is merely change of opinion and the same is impermissible in law. Accordingly, notice issued u/s. 148 is not valid and is liable to be quashed.
