The issue was whether utilisation of corpus donations for expenditure converts them into taxable income. The Tribunal held that corpus retains its exempt character when used as per donor directions and trust deed.
The issue was whether reassessment after three years was barred by limitation. The Tribunal held it valid since the escaped income exceeded ₹50 lakh, attracting the extended reopening window.
The tribunal held that penalty under Section 270A cannot be levied where the assessee voluntarily withdrew the education cess claim after a retrospective amendment. A bona fide claim made on prevailing judicial views does not amount to under-reporting or misreporting.
The case examined penalty levied on estimated additions and statutory disallowance. The Tribunal held that neither category amounts to concealment or inaccurate particulars.
The decision underscores that ignoring audited disclosures, ledgers, and salary records violates principles of natural justice. Once actual payment is proved, gratuity deduction must be allowed.
The issue was an appellate order passed with facts, year, and income of another assessee. The Tribunal held the order void and directed a fresh decision in the correct case.
The advance ruling held that window glass used exclusively in display assemblies is not classifiable as safety glass. Its functional integration with display modules determines classification under electronic parts.
The authority refused to issue an advance ruling after finding that the same issue was already under investigation by customs officers. The ruling reiterates that pending investigations bar maintainability under Section 28-I.
ITAT held that when the same property valuation has been accepted in co-owners’ cases, a contrary view cannot be taken for another co-owner. Consistency in tax treatment is mandatory.
The tribunal held that suspicion, abnormal price rise, or third-party reports are insufficient to deny LTCG exemption. Revenue must establish direct involvement of the taxpayer in price rigging.
