ITAT Hyderabad held that limitation for issuing notice under section 148 of the Income Tax Act would be only 3 years from the end of the assessment year since material suggesting escapement is less than Rs. 50 Lakhs. Hence, notice issued u/s. 148 is beyond period of limitation of three years hence quashed.
Delhi High Court held that employee’s contribution deposited after statutory due date under relevant Acts is disallowed under section 143(1)(a) of the Income Tax Act even if the same is paid before filing of income tax return. Accordingly, question is decided against appellant.
The Tribunal held that rejection of the appeal without a reasoned order violated appellate duties. All issues were restored for de novo consideration with directions to ensure due opportunity.
Authorities taxed refund interest as business income by linking it to earlier PE years. The Tribunal ruled that without a PE in the year of receipt, the income cannot be treated as effectively connected and must enjoy DTAA relief.
The Tribunal emphasized that exemption cannot be denied on assumptions. It restored the case to the AO for limited verification, reinforcing evidence-based assessment by the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal.
The issue was whether cash deposited during demonetisation could be taxed as unexplained money. The Tribunal held that prior withdrawals from the bank sufficiently explained the deposits, warranting deletion of the addition.
The tribunal refused to admit a fresh legal challenge to reassessment raised for the first time. However, it remanded the revenue-difference addition for fresh adjudication due to natural justice concerns.
The case addressed whether an authority can reject registration before completion of parallel statutory processes. The Tribunal held that hurried rejection was unjustified and directed de novo adjudication.
Payments made pursuant to allotment confer valuable property rights. Their relinquishment through an agreement to sell amounts to a statutory transfer, entitling the assessee to compute gains or losses under capital gains.
The tribunal ruled that cash deposits sourced from recorded cash sales and bank withdrawals were genuine. It held that partial, ad-hoc additions without rejecting books of account are unsustainable.
