The court held that reassessment notices for A.Y. 2015–16 issued after 1 April 2021 are invalid based on the Revenue’s concession before the Supreme Court. All consequential proceedings were set aside.
The tribunal held that mere suspicion or possibility of fraud without supporting evidence cannot justify action under Section 66 of the IBC. The ruling underscores the need for concrete proof in alleging fraudulent conduct.
The Tribunal held that the final assessment order passed after the prescribed time limit is invalid. It ruled that limitation begins from the date DRP directions are uploaded on the ITBA portal.
The issue was whether reassessment under Section 147 is valid after a search. The ITAT held it invalid, ruling that only Section 153A applies post-search, making the reassessment void.
The Tribunal held that delay in filing Form 10AB cannot alone justify rejection of 80G approval. It directed reconsideration on merits, emphasizing genuine charitable activity over procedural lapses.
The Tribunal held that a notice under Section 143(2) issued by an unauthorized officer renders the entire assessment invalid. It ruled that jurisdictional defects cannot be cured and quashed the assessment.
The court held that deduction under Section 80P cannot be granted where no return of income is filed. The key takeaway is that claiming deduction in a valid return is mandatory.
The Commission dismissed allegations of anti-competitive conduct as no evidence under Sections 3 or 4 was established. It held that regulatory violations fall outside competition law and must be addressed under other statutes.
The Income Tax Appellate Tribunal held that entire bogus purchases cannot be added when sales are accepted. The only the profit element embedded in such purchases is taxable.
The Appellate Tribunal under SAFEMA held that attachment under PMLA cannot stand without evidence showing flow of tainted funds. The key takeaway is that mere suspicion or indirect linkage is insufficient to sustain attachment.
