The ITAT Kolkata ruled that no disallowance under Section 14A read with Rule 8D can be made if the taxpayer did not earn any exempt income during the relevant financial year. The Tribunal fully allowed the appeal, reiterating the established legal position against mechanical disallowance when there is no dividend or tax-free income.
The ITAT Delhi dismissed the Revenue’s appeal, confirming that the reassessment proceedings initiated in the name of the erstwhile amalgamating company were void ab initio. The Tribunal ruled that since the amalgamation was duly communicated to the Assessing Officer before the assessment, the notice issued to the non-existent entity was invalid in law.
The Delhi High Court dismissed the Revenue’s appeal, affirming that a prior approval for search assessments under Section 153D must involve the superior authority’s conscious application of mind. The Court held that approvals granted mechanically or through a single omnibus letter for numerous assessments are invalid, thereby quashing the assessment.
Court held that authorities cannot block Input Tax Credit accrued after the date of action, directing restoration of ₹1.43 crore to the taxpayer while upholding blockage of earlier credit.
The ITAT Pune condoned a 100-day delay in filing the tax appeal, citing reasonable cause due to the taxpayer’s reliance on professional advice and relocation. Adopting a justice-oriented approach, the Tribunal allowed the appeal to be heard on its merits, reinforcing the principle that substantive justice prevails over procedural lapses.
The ITAT struck down the additions, observing that the AO’s jurisdiction was potentially vitiated by a mechanical, consolidated approval for reopening, and the additions themselves relied solely on an uncorroborated statement and rough papers. The ruling confirms that unverified, rough documents lack sufficient evidentiary value to sustain income additions.
The ITAT Ahmedabad deleted a Rs.7.46 lakh disallowance of employees’ PF contribution, ruling that payment made on the next working day is timely when the statutory due date falls on a Sunday. The ruling applied Section 10 of the General Clauses Act, confirming that the delay was valid and unavoidable.
ITAT Mumbai deleted a Rs.34.65 crore addition under Section 68 for unsecured loans, ruling that requirement to prove source of source only applies from A.Y. 2013-14 onwards. Tribunal held that proving the identity, genuineness, and creditworthiness of loan creditors was sufficient for year under appeal.
The ITAT Delhi ruled that the reassessment was invalid because the issue of setting off prior-year speculative losses was already examined in the original scrutiny assessment. The quashing relied on the “change of opinion” doctrine, as the AO used no new tangible material to reopen the case.
ITAT Delhi held that reopening beyond four years requires sanction from the Principal Commissioner or Commissioner. Approval taken from the Joint Commissioner rendered the reassessment invalid.
