The Delhi High Court held that the period granted to an assessee for filing a reply under Section 148A(b) must be excluded while calculating limitation under Section 149. Since the Assessing Officer acted within the permissible period, the reassessment proceedings were upheld.
The Tribunal held that long-term capital losses can be carried forward even when long-term capital gains are exempt under the India–Mauritius DTAA. Exempt gains do not enter the computation of total income and therefore cannot absorb the losses.
The Surat ITAT held that for assessment years prior to AY 2013-14, the DVO had no authority under Section 55A to reduce the fair market value adopted by an assessee based on a registered valuer’s report. The resulting LTCG addition was therefore deleted.
The Tribunal held that business promotion, petrol, and travel expenses cannot be disallowed merely on assumptions of possible personal use. In the absence of specific defects or evidence, ad hoc disallowance under Section 37(1) was deleted.
The Mumbai ITAT held that reassessment initiated beyond three years was invalid because the alleged escaped income was only ₹5 lakh, far below the ₹50 lakh requirement under Section 149(1)(b). As a result, the reassessment and consequential assessment order were quashed.
The assessee had fully disclosed the share transactions and claimed exemption under Section 10(38) in the original return. The ITAT ruled that reopening was unsustainable because the reasons recorded did not demonstrate how any income had actually escaped assessment.
Fee reduction of ₹50,000 for the Interim Resolution Professional (IRP) ordered by NCLT was reasonable, given that the IRP’s role was restricted by an interim stay on the constitution of the Committee of Creditors (CoC) between February 28 and September 1, 2023.
Periodic or annual fees paid to a sports governing body to sustain annual league participation rights qualify as operational revenue expenses, not capital investments. Hospitality, travel, and boarding expenses incurred on celebrities and VIPs were fully deductible if they were used strategically to amplify brand visibility, ticket distribution, and corporate sponsorships.
The issue was whether a toll contractor should receive relief after the government significantly reduced toll rates shortly after awarding the contract. The High Court granted interim protection against contract cancellation, subject to payment of a reduced monthly amount, and directed the committee to decide the representation expeditiously.
ITAT Ahmedabad held that the Transfer Pricing Officer cannot determine the arm’s length price of intra-group services at Nil merely based on assumptions regarding benefit or commercial necessity.
