ITAT Mumbai deleted the addition under Section 56(2)(vii)(b) after holding that a 2.3% variation between agreement value and stamp duty value fell within the permissible tolerance band applicable retrospectively.
SC dismissed Revenue’s challenge against Calcutta HC ruling that reassessment proceedings based only on suspicion and investigation reports were invalid under Section 147.
The Calcutta High Court held that reassessment proceedings cannot be reopened merely on suspicion arising from investigation reports. The Court ruled that “reason to believe” must be based on independent application of mind and material evidence.
The Bombay High Court held that blocking of Input Tax Credit under Rule 86A automatically ceases after one year. The Court ruled that continued restriction beyond the statutory period was illegal and arbitrary.
Bombay High Court held that short deduction of TDS under a different provision does not trigger disallowance under Section 40(a)(ia). Court ruled that only cases of non-deduction or non-payment of TDS attract provision.
ITAT Hyderabad held that rural agricultural land situated beyond 8 kilometres from municipal limits cannot be taxed as a capital asset merely because the purchaser later used it for commercial plotting. The Tribunal ruled that future use by the buyer does not alter the land’s character in the seller’s hands.
ITAT Delhi deleted a ₹45 lakh addition under Section 68 after finding that the assessee had furnished complete details of investor companies and share allotment. The Tribunal held that verified share application money could not be treated as unexplained cash credit.
ITAT Delhi restored a Section 69A addition after holding that the assessee failed to produce evidence supporting its claim that the seized cash was meant for inter-branch transfer. The Tribunal found the explanation unsupported and inconsistent with available records.
CESTAT Hyderabad held that seizure of foreign-marked gold without separately recorded reasons under Section 110 of the Customs Act was legally defective. The Tribunal ruled that subsequent confiscation and penalties could not survive.
ITAT Rajkot held that revision under section 263 was not sustainable where the Assessing Officer had already conducted extensive verification of agricultural income and expenses. The Tribunal observed that detailed notices, documentary evidence, and independent inquiries were part of the original assessment proceedings.
