CAAR Delhi ruled that Wired Remote Controllers for air-conditioning systems are classifiable under Tariff Item 8537 10 90 as electrical control consoles, not under 8415 90 00 as AC parts, based on functional and technical identity.
Samkwang India seeks advance ruling from CAAR Delhi on nil duty benefit for inputs used to manufacture Assy Case Front’ (front cover) for Samsung mobile phones under Notification 57/2017-Cus, arguing their process qualifies as ‘manufacture.
The Tribunal directed the PCIT to reconsider a u/s 263 order, emphasizing that the PCIT is legally bound to examine and deal with the assessee’s explanations, such as increased sales due to an early festival season. The key takeaway is that merely issuing a notice is insufficient; the PCIT’s final order must be a speaking order that addresses all submissions.
The ITAT set aside the PCIT’s revision order, confirming that the revisional power under Section 263 cannot be invoked merely to conduct a deeper inquiry or change a view previously taken by the AO. Since the AO had specifically examined and verified the share’s Fair Market Value (FMV) during the original scrutiny, the assessment was neither erroneous nor prejudicial to the Revenue.
The ITAT ruled that a cash deposit addition under 69A of the Income Tax Act cannot stand if the source is accepted as business turnover and presumptive profit under Sec.44AD is declared. The tribunal accepted the taxpayers explanation of cash deposits from mobile phone sales, linking them to credit card purchases, but directed an 8% profit rate be applied to the turnover.
The ITAT ruled the entire reassessment void ab initio because the 148 notice, issued after March 29, 2022, was served by the Jurisdictional AO (JAO) instead of the mandatory Faceless AO (FAO). Following High Court precedent, the tribunal held that this is a non-curable jurisdictional defect that voids the notice and the subsequent assessment.
The ITAT voided multiple search assessments because the statutory approval under Section 153D was found to be mechanical and without independent application of mind. The Tribunal emphasized that a single, proforma approval for 42 assessment orders across multiple assessees, lacking specific facts or reasoning, renders the entire assessment void ab initio.
Upholding a crucial legal principle, the ITAT ruled that where a businesss income is estimated on a percentage-of-turnover basis, any additions made under 68 for items like unsecured loans or capital on the basis of unverified entries must be deleted. The decision provides relief by confirming that estimated net profit covers the source of cash and capital.
Tribunal ruled that registration under Section 12AB can be cancelled only upon proven specified violations, not on suspicion or ongoing assessments, restoring society’s registration.
The ITAT Chandigarh quashed income tax assessments under Section 153A, ruling that the mandatory Section 153D approval was mechanical and invalid. The Tribunal held that the approving authority failed to apply independent reasoning, using a ‘rubber stamp’ proforma for multiple assessees without considering specific facts or seized material, thus making the entire assessment void ab initio.
