Mumbai ITAT ruled that investment in rights relating to a specific residential flat under a redevelopment project qualifies for Section 54 relief. The Tribunal held that beneficial provisions should receive a liberal interpretation when substantial compliance is established.
The Agra ITAT held that disallowance of employees’ PF and ESI contributions could not be made through Section 143(1) processing when the legal position was unsettled. The ruling emphasizes that highly debatable issues fall outside the scope of prima facie adjustments.
The Chandigarh ITAT held that deduction under Section 54 cannot be restricted merely because the new residential property is jointly held with a spouse. The decisive factor is the source of investment, which in this case originated entirely from the assessee.
The Agra ITAT held that an independent addition under Section 69A was unsustainable when the AO had accepted the assessee’s declared business income. The Tribunal directed reconsideration of the deposits after evaluating the business receipts.
The Kerala High Court permitted the Official Liquidator to prematurely close fixed deposits to facilitate payment of dividends to creditors. The Court also approved related steps necessary for completing the disbursement process.
The Tribunal held that transfer pricing analysis should focus on international transactions rather than entity-level profitability where segmental data is available. The case was remanded for fresh consideration of comparables and ALP determination.
The Madras High Court held that Section 125 cannot be invoked where the GST law specifically provides for late fee under Section 47 for non-filing defaults. The ruling clarifies that general penalty provisions operate only in the absence of a specific penalty mechanism.
The Court directed authorities to consider restoration of GST registration where the taxpayer undertook to furnish pending returns and pay tax, interest, penalty, and late fees in accordance with Rule 22(4).
The Delhi ITAT ruled that no installation or supervisory PE existed in India as the activities did not exceed the 120-day threshold under the India-Canada DTAA. Consequently, income attribution to the alleged PE was held to be unsustainable.
The ITAT held that a penalty under Section 271AAC could not be decided independently when the underlying assessment had already been remanded for fresh adjudication. The penalty issue was restored to the AO for reconsideration after completion of quantum proceedings.
