The Tribunal held that the Assessing Officer cannot examine issues beyond the scope of limited scrutiny without approval. Since total deposits were assessed instead of only demonetization deposits, the addition was invalid and deleted.
The issue involved rejection of a delayed claim in bankruptcy proceedings. The Tribunal held that concealment of material facts by the debtor prevented timely filing. It ruled that such delay could be condoned when sufficiently explained and directed admission of the claim.
The court interpreted the scope of Section 91 CrPC in summoning documents. It ruled that parties cannot demand documents as a matter of right. The judgment stresses that relevance is the key criterion.
The issue involved denial of service tax refund on employee insurance services in an SEZ unit. The Tribunal held that such insurance services fall within authorised operations and cannot be excluded.
The case examined whether compensation paid to exit prior agreements was a sham arrangement. The Tribunal ruled it was a valid business decision that enabled higher sale consideration.
The Tribunal quashed reassessment proceedings as they were based on a mere change of opinion without any fresh tangible material. It held that re-examining already scrutinized facts does not justify reopening under section 147.
The Tribunal held that an unsigned agreement without corroboration cannot be treated as incriminating material. Proceedings under section 153C were declared invalid.
The Tribunal held that payments and delivery handled by the assessee’s PA indicated control over the transaction. The absence of evidence supporting the daughter’s role led to confirmation of addition.
The appeal involved a legal challenge regarding absence of notice under Section 143(2). The Tribunal held that failure to adjudicate this issue required fresh consideration and remanded the matter.
The case addressed whether a custodian could be held liable for duty when container contents differed from declared goods. The Tribunal held that without proof of tampered or broken seals, liability under section 45 cannot be imposed.
