The tribunal held that assessments selected for limited scrutiny cannot include additions on unrelated issues without formal conversion to complete scrutiny. All such additions were set aside as being without jurisdiction.
The case examined the tax treatment of purchases from alleged accommodation entry providers. The Tribunal held that at best, only the profit element embedded in such purchases can be brought to tax.
The Supreme Court has taken up the controversy over delayed employees’ PF/ESI deposits, while the High Court upheld disallowance except where delay was due to a national holiday.
The Assessing Officer disallowed interest expenditure in an ex parte order under section 144. The Tribunal ruled that once evidence shows a clear link between interest paid and interest earned, the deduction must be allowed.
The application was rejected only on limitation without examining merits. The Tribunal ruled that bona fide delay must be condoned and eligibility under section 80G(5) examined afresh.
ITAT Delhi held that Final Assessment Order passed u/s 143(3) r.w.s. 144C(13) passed beyond time limit prescribed under section 153 of the Income Tax Act is barred by limitation. Accordingly, Final Assessment Order is liable to be quashed.
The Revenue relied on ITS data to allege unexplained cash deposits. The Tribunal ruled that where cash books and stock registers are maintained without defects, such additions are unsustainable.
The ITAT held that when reassessment is annulled for jurisdictional defects under the faceless regime, the connected concealment penalty cannot stand.
The issue was whether additions could be made for an unabated year without any seized material. The Tribunal held that in the absence of incriminating evidence found during search, the assessment under section 153A was invalid and liable to be quashed.
The Tribunal held that overseas shares acquired from reinvested dividends cannot be taxed as undisclosed assets when the source is known and accepted. Mere omission of dividend income does not trigger the Black Money Act’s harsh provisions.
