Income Tax : ITAT Mumbai held that an addition under Section 69A cannot be sustained when the assessee is denied the opportunity to cross-exami...
Income Tax : ITAT Mumbai remanded the case to examine whether Section 56(2)(x) applied based on the agreement date and to consider refund of ex...
Income Tax : ITAT Kolkata condoned appeal delay, set aside the CIT(A)'s order, and remanded the assessment for fresh adjudication after grantin...
Income Tax : ITAT Nagpur held that a 50-year lease is not a transfer under Section 2(47)(vi) where the transaction is only a lease and not an a...
Income Tax : ITAT Ahmedabad allowed Section 10(10B) exemption on BSNL VRS compensation, following coordinate bench rulings despite no claim in ...
Income Tax : ITAT held an assessment passed after the taxpayer's death was invalid in law, quashed the order, and treated all remaining issues ...
The Tribunal examined whether repayment of earlier loans could be taxed as unexplained money. It held that once loans were accepted as genuine and repayment sources were explained, no addition could survive.
The issue was whether reassessment can proceed without furnishing recorded reasons despite a taxpayers request. The Tribunal held that failure to supply reasons is a jurisdictional defect that invalidates reassessment.
The issue was whether income disclosed during survey and duly reported in the return can attract penalty under Section 270A. The Tribunal held that when returned income equals assessed income, penalty provisions do not apply.
The issue was whether reassessment is valid when reasons for reopening are not placed on record. The Tribunal held that non-recording of reasons under Section 148(2) vitiates jurisdiction, rendering the reassessment void.
The reassessment was challenged for lacking approval from the correct authority under Section 151 after three years. The Tribunal held that sanction by an incorrect authority vitiates jurisdiction, rendering the reassessment void.
The Tribunal held that while fee suppression was established during survey proceedings, the entire difference could not be taxed. Only the gross profit on suppressed receipts, excluding GST, is chargeable to tax.
The decision reiterates that when books of account, sales, and inventory are accepted, purchase disallowances cannot be made mechanically. Suspicion cannot replace proof in tax proceedings.
The Tribunal ruled that completion of assessment after search, despite statutory abatement, is impermissible. Jurisdiction shifts exclusively to Section 153A proceedings.
The tribunal held that penalty under Section 270A cannot be levied where the assessee voluntarily withdrew the education cess claim after a retrospective amendment. A bona fide claim made on prevailing judicial views does not amount to under-reporting or misreporting.
The decision underscores that ignoring audited disclosures, ledgers, and salary records violates principles of natural justice. Once actual payment is proved, gratuity deduction must be allowed.
