Interest was disallowed treating the loan as bogus. Once the loan itself was held genuine, the Tribunal allowed the interest deduction. The ruling confirms that business interest cannot be denied without proof of sham transactions.
Whether cash deposited during demonetisation could be taxed in the society’s hands. Ruling & Takeaway: The Tribunal held that once cash is admitted to belong to members, no addition under section 68 can be made in the society’s assessment.
Expenditure on tunnel-specific infrastructure was ruled not to give enduring benefit beyond the contract period. The ruling clarifies that longevity alone does not convert temporary project tools into capital assets.
The PCIT sought to revise the assessment for lack of arms length determination. The Tribunal ruled that the Assessing Officer cannot be faulted when the TPO did not act. The decision reinforces limits on section 263.
Whether interest earned on fixed deposits by a credit co-operative society qualifies for deduction under section 80P(2)(a)(i). Ruling & Takeaway: The Tribunal held that interest from depositing surplus business funds in permitted banks is attributable to the credit business and eligible for deduction.
Authorities added ₹8 crore as unexplained investment in the wrong year. The Tribunal confirmed that the cash component belonged to a prior year. The ruling stresses year-specific taxation of undisclosed transactions.
The Tribunal held that shares acquired directly from promoters through preferential allotment require strict scrutiny when linked to abnormal price rise. Failure to establish commercial rationale justified restoring the matter for fresh verification.
Whether large cash deposits during demonetisation could be explained as cash sales. Ruling & Takeaway: The Tribunal upheld addition under section 69A, finding implausible sales patterns, rejected books, and lack of evidence; human probability prevailed over book entries.
The Tribunal examined whether a single approval could cover multiple assessment years in search cases. It held that separate approvals are mandatory for each year. The ruling underscores strict procedural compliance under section 153D.
While an error in computation was acknowledged, prejudice to Revenue was not established. The Tribunal quashed the revision for lack of both ingredients. The ruling clarifies strict thresholds for invoking section 263.
