Appellate Tribunal confirmed that money is a liquid form of asset under FEMA Section 3(d), rejecting the exporter’s argument to the contrary in a fraudulent export scheme. The Tribunal confirmed the contravention but reduced the cumulative penalty from Rs.12 lakh to Rs.6 lakh.
The Appellate Tribunal dismissed the Union of India’s appeal seeking enhancement of the ₹1 crore penalty imposed on two individuals for FEMA violations related to an overseas property purchase. The Tribunal affirmed the Special Director’s decision, holding that the levied penalty was reasonable considering the facts, including the payment of a loan by the father despite the property being in the son’s name.
The ITAT Kolkata dismissed an appeal filed by Santhosh Devi Soni as withdrawn after the assessee elected to settle the tax dispute under the Direct Tax Vivad Se Viswas (DTVSV) Scheme, 2024. The Tribunal accepted the withdrawal request since the dispute was resolved under the settlement scheme.
The ITAT Lucknow quashed the ex-parte appellate orders for AY 2013-14, 2015-16, and 2016-17, ruling that the CIT(A) failed in its statutory duty to pass a speaking order on the appeal merits. The case is remitted for a de novo assessment.
ITAT Mumbai held that a penalty under Section 271(1)(c) was premature when the related quantum appeal was still pending, remitting the matter back for fresh consideration.
The Appellate Tribunal held that an attempted foreign exchange transaction is not a contravention under FEMA Section 3(d), as the Act requires an actual financial transaction. The Tribunal dismissed the Enforcement Directorate’s plea for confiscation of ₹89.70 lakh and ordered the refund of the balance after adjusting the penalties.
ITAT Mumbai quashed a Rs.10 lakh penalty under Black Money Act, ruling that DDIT(Inv.) lacked necessary pecuniary jurisdiction to impose penalties exceeding ₹5 lakh. Decision strictly enforces CBDT guidelines, which reserve penalty proceedings requiring JCIT approval for regular Assessing Officer, deeming DDIT(Inv.) order as being without jurisdiction.
ITAT Chennai deleted additions made in search assessments (u/s 153A), ruling that Income Tax Department cannot make additions without specific, incriminating material seized during search. Following Supreme Courts ruling in Abhisar Buildwell, Tribunal held that search assessments are not fishing expeditions and must be strictly limited to evidence found post-search.
ITAT Delhi deleted a Rs.20.33 crore penalty under Section 271(1)(c), ruling that penalty notice was invalid because it failed to specify exact charge: concealment of income or furnishing inaccurate particulars. Ruling reinforces that an ambiguous, omnibus notice is a jurisdictional defect that vitiates penalty, even if assessment order records satisfaction.
The ITAT Mumbai dismissed appeals under the Black Money Act as withdrawn after the assessee received full relief from the CIT(A), who deleted the additions on the merits of beneficial ownership. Since the Department did not challenge the relief, the assessee chose not to pursue the technical and jurisdictional grounds before the Tribunal.
