ITAT Delhi held that higher TDS under Section 206AA applied where the seller’s PAN was not linked with Aadhaar. However, the Tribunal observed that the tax department should have incorporated system alerts for inoperative PANs and remanded the matter for fresh verification.
The Bangalore ITAT held that indexation benefit for capital gains must be allowed from the year the property was first rented and income was offered to tax, not from the date of occupancy certificate.
Delhi ITAT upheld deletion of addition made under Section 69A after finding that the assessee produced complete documentary evidence for purchase and sale of LDPL shares. The Tribunal ruled that suspicion and investigation reports alone cannot override genuine DEMAT, bank and broker records.
The Supreme Court held that allegations that GPAs were executed only as loan security failed because the appellant produced no proof of loan repayment, interest payment or discharge of debt. The burden initially remained on the person alleging fraud and sham transactions.
ITAT Mumbai ruled that once reassessment proceedings are quashed as void ab initio, the satisfaction recorded therein for initiating penalty proceedings cannot survive independently. The Tribunal relied on the Supreme Court ruling in Jaya Lakshmi Rice Mills.
The Madras High Court held that membership fees received for long-term time-share agreements could not be fully taxed in the first year because the assessee had continuing obligations to provide facilities over 99 years.
The ITAT Chandigarh held that reassessment proceedings initiated under an incorrect and obsolete PAN suffered from a jurisdictional defect. The Tribunal ruled that failure to consider the assessee’s reply under Section 148A invalidated the reassessment proceedings.
ITAT Delhi deleted transfer pricing adjustments after holding that retail and after-sales businesses could not be compared with wholesale trading to OEMs. The Tribunal ruled that comparables must satisfy functional and market similarity under Rule 10B(2).
The Court held that cancellation of GST registration is justified where material indicates that ITC claims are supported by fabricated documents and fake invoices. The appeal against cancellation was dismissed.
The Bombay High Court set aside the GST cancellation order after finding that no reasons were recorded and no personal hearing was granted. The matter was remanded for fresh adjudication following due process.
