Tribunal noted that the assessee received Form 3 under the Direct Tax Vivad Se Vishwas Act, 2020, and accordingly dismissed the pending appeal as withdrawn.
Madras High Court held that inquiry report under Regulation 17 of the Customs Brokers Licensing Regulation, 2018 [CBLR] submitted beyond the period of 90 days is against mandate provided under sub-Regulation (5) of Regulation 17 hence inquiry report is illegal, arbitrary and barred by limitation.
Madras High Court held that time limit of six years is reasonable time for passing of order under section 201 of the Income Tax Act in respect of non-residents. Accordingly, order impugning assessment years beyond six years is set aside.
ITAT Mumbai held the disallowance on basis that the ESOP expenses is contingent in nature cannot be sustained. However, amount claimed as expenditure, the basis of allocation of ESOP cost by GSGI etc., needs to be factually examined. Hence, matter remanded.
ITAT Delhi rules wife not liable to prove husband and sons’ source of funds for property purchase. Addition of Rs.1.10 Cr u/s 69 quashed as family funds explained.
Sanjay Garg Vs DCIT (ITAT Delhi) Assessee challenged assessments framed u/s 153A r.w.s. 143(3) on the ground that mandatory approval u/s 153D was granted mechanically without proper application of mind. AO had made an addition of Rs.50,00,000/- as unexplained money u/s 69, which was confirmed by CIT(A)-24, New Delhi vide order dated 28.02.2025. Before Tribunal, […]
The Tribunal held that an addition cannot be sustained on the basis of a PAN mismatch alone, especially when the assessee, an individual with no business activity, was wrongly linked to a corporate entity.
ITAT upheld the deletion of disallowance on deduction u/s 80IA for ground handling profits at DIAL and CIAL. Citing SC precedent (Delhi International Airport Pvt. Ltd.),
ITAT Delhi dismissed Revenue’s appeal, confirming deletion of a Rs. 25 crore penalty imposed under Section 271D. Tribunal ruled that penalty, based solely on a seized MOU and assumptions without proof of cash movement, was not legally sustainable.
ITAT Delhi quashes Rs.8.16 crore addition on share capital and commission, emphasizing that mere suspicion without evidence cannot justify tax additions. Investor genuineness and banking records were upheld.
