Income Tax : ITAT held that where sales are not disputed, entire purchases cannot be disallowed. Only 15% profit element was taxed, reinforcing...
Income Tax : The Tribunal quashed reassessment proceedings as they were based on a mere change of opinion without any fresh tangible material. ...
Income Tax : The issue involved levy of late fees on TDS returns processed before statutory amendment. The Tribunal held that absence of enabli...
Income Tax : The Tribunal held that valuation without giving the assessee an opportunity to object violates natural justice. It remanded the ma...
Income Tax : The Tribunal condoned delay due to reasonable cause and addressed valuation mismatch. It remanded the issue for DVO-based reassess...
The Tribunal ruled that failure to specify underreporting or misreporting in notice invalidates penalty. Proper identification of charge is mandatory for valid proceedings.
ITAT held that reassessment initiated with approval from the wrong authority is invalid when issued beyond three years. The entire proceedings were quashed. The key takeaway is that proper sanction under Section 151 is mandatory.
ITAT held that estimating profit at 8% without considering records was excessive. It reduced the rate to 3% based on business realities. The key takeaway is that estimation must be reasonable and evidence-based.
The Tribunal condoned a delay of 615 days after finding that the assessee was actively pursuing rectification remedies under Section 154. It held that such bona fide conduct constitutes sufficient cause and delay cannot be treated as negligence.
ITAT held that an unexplained delay of over 11 years cannot be condoned without valid reasons. The appeal was dismissed as no sufficient cause was proved.
ITAT held that late filing of Form 67 is only a procedural lapse and not a ground to deny FTC. The matter was remanded for verification and grant of eligible credit.
The issue involved denial of exemption on sale of agricultural land. The Tribunal held that the land met conditions of Section 2(14)(iii), making gains non-taxable. The case examined whether land sale constituted business income. The Tribunal ruled that absence of development or trading intent invalidated such classification.
The issue was whether reassessment can survive when no addition is made on the stated reasons for reopening. The Tribunal held that such reassessment is invalid, and the AO cannot make unrelated additions.
The tribunal set aside excessive addition by recognizing both the allotment agreement and joint ownership. It directed proportionate taxation and correct valuation basis. The ruling promotes fairness in assessments.
The tribunal allowed adoption of stamp value as on the agreement date instead of registration. It held the proviso to Section 50C is retrospective as it removes hardship. This provides relief in cases of delayed registration.
