The Tribunal found that reasonable opportunity was not given at assessment or appellate stage. The ₹17.94 lakh addition was remanded for fresh adjudication.
The Tribunal dismissed the Revenue’s appeal, noting that transferred employees performed functions entirely for the assessee. Salary expenditure was held to be incurred for business purposes.
The Court held that the petitioner suppressed the fact of an earlier withdrawn writ challenging the same order. The petition was dismissed with costs and limited relief granted only for statutory application.
The tribunal upheld dismissal of a bank’s appeal, holding that repeated applications were unnecessary when earlier orders already permitted recovery through auction of attached properties.
The Appellate Tribunal upheld the reduction of future interest where the lender failed to disburse the entire sanctioned loan on time. The ruling affirms that tribunals may lower interest rates when lender conduct affects project completion.
The Tribunal held that cash paid for a flat booking was explained through documented bank withdrawals. Unexplained investment addition was therefore deleted.
The Tribunal examined whether royalty and dead rent from mining leases could be taxed as renting of immovable property. It held that grant of mining rights is a sovereign function and not a taxable service.
The Tribunal held that payment of the balance sale consideration without a written extension violates Rule 9(4). Auction sale and sale certificate were therefore declared invalid.
The Tribunal found that indexation was wrongly applied from a later year. It held that long-term capital gains must be computed from the first year the property was held.
The Court held that issuing two interest demands for delay in filing GSTR-3B for the same period amounted to duplication and double taxation, and quashed the second order.
