The dispute arose from survey-based additions relying mainly on a statement and impounded agreement. The Tribunal held that the matter needed fresh examination and remanded it to the AO with one final opportunity.
ITAT Pune admitted affidavits and satellite images showing land under cultivation, restoring the issue to AO for reassessment. Proper evidence can overturn non-agri classification for capital gains.
ITAT Pune struck down a ₹34.28 lakh penalty issued after the company had merged, citing substantive illegality. Penalty orders must be issued in the name of a legally existing entity.
The assessee failed to file returns for two years preceding the capital increase. The Tribunal held that unexplained capital accretion must be taxed under section 68.
ITAT Surat struck down a 50% turnover-based income estimation, applying Section 44AD to compute actual presumptive profit at 8%. Key takeaway: AO cannot inflate income without legal basis.
The Tribunal held that a bare endorsement like fit case does not amount to valid sanction. Absence of independent application of mind invalidates the entire reassessment.
Concerns were raised that the definition could narrow protected areas and enable unregulated mining. The Court ordered an independent expert review before any enforcement.
Bombay High Court held that issuance of notice for demand of interest and penalty after obtaining discharge certificate under Sabka Vishwas (Legacy Dispute Resolution) Scheme, 2019 [SVLDRS] is not tenable in law. Writ disposed of, accordingly.
Bombay High Court held that interest under section 25(4) of the GVAT on delayed payment of VAT on sales of High Bouquet Spirit (HBS)/Rectified Spirit (RS)/Extra Neutral Alcohol (ENA) justifiable in spite of uncertainty with regard to levy to be imposed on the same.
The revision questioned deduction on interest income allowed under section 80P. The Tribunal held that where the AO adopts a legally plausible view after enquiry, section 263 cannot be invoked.
