The ITAT dismissed the appeal in limine after the assessee failed to rectify signing and verification defects despite multiple opportunities. Signing of appeal documents was held to be foundational to maintainability.
The Tribunal held that an assessment framed without a valid notice under Section 143(2) by the jurisdictional officer is void. Jurisdictional compliance is mandatory.
The ITAT upheld deletion of a major share premium addition after finding that all investors complied with notices under Section 133(6) and furnished requisite documents. The ruling reiterates that once the three ingredients of Section 68 are satisfied, the burden shifts to the Revenue.
The ITAT ruled that section 269SS targets cash advances in property deals, not final sale consideration paid at registration. Penalty under section 271D was therefore not leviable.
The Tribunal held that estimating closing stock without rejecting books or identifying defects is unsustainable. Mere assumptions of revenue leakage cannot justify additions.
The Tribunal held that section 269SS targets cash advances in property transactions. Cash received at the time of registration was found to be outside its scope.
The judgment clarified that delayed installment interest arises from a debtor–creditor relationship, not a service supply, and therefore cannot be subjected to GST.
The High Court quashed reassessment notices holding that mere receipt of dividends and capital loss does not establish sham transactions. Allegations against fund managers cannot automatically implicate investors.
ITAT Mumbai held that condoning a delay in filing an appeal does not replace the right to present submissions on merits and remanded the case for fresh adjudication.
The Tribunal held that amalgamation approved by the High Court cannot be treated as a sham or business reconstruction. Deduction under Section 80IC was upheld as the eligible unit continued unchanged.
