The dispute involved unexplained cash deposits in bank accounts. The Tribunal ruled that deposits partly belonged to the principal, reducing the addition.
The court held that delay in filing returns can bar deduction under Section 80P. It directed the taxpayer to seek condonation under Section 119(2)(b). The ruling emphasizes compliance with statutory timelines.
The tribunal held that penalty cannot be imposed where there is no intentional misdeclaration. The presence of seeds was detected only after testing. The ruling highlights the importance of proving mens rea for penalties.
The issue was whether addition can be made only on survey admission. The Tribunal held that without corroborative evidence, such addition is unsustainable.
The court held that rejecting an appeal solely due to non-appearance is improper. Authorities must consider written submissions and pass a reasoned order. The ruling reinforces fair adjudication principles.
The issue involved cancellation of GST registration for non-filing of returns. The Court held that registration can be revived if pending returns and dues are cleared as per prescribed conditions.
The issue involved cancellation for non-filing of returns during the pandemic. The Court held that registration can be restored subject to filing returns and payment of dues.
The issue involved SBN deposits treated as unexplained despite being part of recorded sales. The Tribunal held that taxing the same amount again results in impermissible double taxation.
The issue involved cash deposits during demonetization treated as unexplained. The Tribunal held that deposits backed by recorded sales cannot be taxed under Section 68.
The case involved unexplained cash deposits during demonetization. The Tribunal upheld addition for unexplained shortage but deleted addition where advances were supported by evidence.
