The Tribunal held that conflicting judicial views on Section 10(38) exemption made the issue debatable. Since the assessee disclosed all facts, penalty for concealment could not survive despite later denial of exemption.
The Tribunal quashed additions for bogus purchases, cash seizures, and transfer pricing adjustments, affirming the AOP’s unified management and correct taxation at the consortium level.
ITAT Delhi restored the matter to AO, allowing the assessee to submit evidence on share and agricultural status of land to correctly determine capital gains.
ITAT Delhi allowed ESOP expenses of Rs. 54 lakh, emphasizing adherence to accounting principles and SEBI guidelines. Prior judicial precedents guided deletion of the AO’s disallowance.
The Tribunal admitted a Section 7 insolvency petition after finding default exceeding ₹1 crore and noting the debtor’s non-appearance. Key takeaway: uncontroverted financial debt and default mandate CIRP admission.
The Calcutta High Court held that recovering more than 20% of a disputed tax demand from other refunds while an appeal is pending is impermissible. The ruling directs the Income Tax authorities to refund the excess amount.
The Court ruled that ITC reversal is unsustainable when the supplier was registered and tax was duly paid. The petitioner’s ITC claim was upheld as legitimate.
The Tribunal emphasized that for notices issued before 01.04.2021, the sanctioning power rested solely with the JCIT, making the PCIT’s approval invalid. Consequently, the ₹82.89 crore disallowance and all further proceedings were set aside.
The judgment clarified the distinction between personal and newly purchased gold, allowing the petitioner to contest confiscation under customs regulations.
ITAT allowed exemption under Section 11, holding that Revenue cannot deny benefits due to clerical omission of registration details. Key takeaway: procedural mistakes should not override substantive law.
