ITAT Mumbai deleted a Rs.34.65 crore addition under Section 68 for unsecured loans, ruling that requirement to prove source of source only applies from A.Y. 2013-14 onwards. Tribunal held that proving the identity, genuineness, and creditworthiness of loan creditors was sufficient for year under appeal.
The ITAT Delhi ruled that the reassessment was invalid because the issue of setting off prior-year speculative losses was already examined in the original scrutiny assessment. The quashing relied on the “change of opinion” doctrine, as the AO used no new tangible material to reopen the case.
ITAT Delhi held that reopening beyond four years requires sanction from the Principal Commissioner or Commissioner. Approval taken from the Joint Commissioner rendered the reassessment invalid.
Court held that maintenance charges in a housing society are recurring liabilities, and claims filed within six years remain valid under Section 92 of the Maharashtra Cooperative Societies Act.
The Karnataka High Court disposed of the Buckeye Trust petition after the ITAT President assigned the matter to a new bench, following a High Court order that restrained a Judicial Member involved in an allegedly AI-driven decision from hearing the case.
The ITAT addressed whether a ₹ 28.94 Cr penalty was time-barred, focusing on whether the penalty initiation date starts with the AO’s satisfaction or the Addl. CIT’s notice.
ITAT Chandigarh held that reopening of assessment under section 148 of the Income Tax Act merely on the basis of ‘reasons to suspect’ rather than on ‘reason to believe’ is invalid in the eye of law. Held that passive reliance on third-party intelligence would render the reopening invalid as it reflected merely a ‘reason to suspect’.
Calcutta High Court held that writ petition is not entertained due to availability of alternative efficacious remedy under the provisions of Income Tax Act against the final assessment order. Accordingly, writ petition dismissed.
NCLAT Chennai held that there would be no Security Interest which could be said to have been created in absence of there being any Registered Sale Deed. Thus, by not registering the MoDT, retention of title deeds of property of Corporate Debtor not justifiable.
Delhi High Court held that license fees paid for use of goodwill is allowable as business expenditure. Accordingly, the same is deductible under section 37 of the Income Tax Act. Thus, appeal of revenue dismissed.
