ITAT Ahmedabad held that CPC cannot suo motu reclassify an apartment owners association as a co-operative society while processing returns under Section 143(1). The Tribunal deleted the Rs. 97,690 demand after finding the adjustment beyond the scope of prima facie processing.
CESTAT Allahabad held that service tax demand raised merely on differences between ST-3 returns and Income Tax Returns without proper examination of records was unsustainable in law.
The Tribunal ruled that a genuine share transaction resulting in a short-term loss cannot automatically be treated as a make-believe or accommodation entry transaction. The assessee’s regular trading history supported the genuineness of the transactions.
CESTAT Ahmedabad held that once a partnership firm is penalized under customs law, a separate penalty on its partner for the same contravention cannot be imposed in absence of specific statutory provision.
ITAT Ahmedabad held that reassessment under Section 147 was invalid as the Assessing Officer failed to show independent application of mind or establish a nexus between investigation material and escaped income.
ITAT Nagpur held that nominal donations received in small amounts could not be treated as non-voluntary contributions merely because PAN or full address details of donors were unavailable. The Tribunal found no adverse evidence questioning the genuineness of donations or activities.
The ITAT Surat held that abnormal price rise in a penny stock and surrounding circumstances justified treating claimed LTCG as unexplained income under Section 68. The Tribunal found the transactions to be part of a pre-arranged accommodation entry scheme.
The Tribunal upheld disallowance of deduction under Section 80GGC after finding the political donation lacked genuineness. The ruling highlights that payments through banking channels alone cannot establish a valid deduction when surrounding facts indicate accommodation entries.
Chhattisgarh High Court held that alleged low production yield and power consumption variations could not justify addition without supporting evidence of unaccounted sales. The Court ruled that assessment cannot be based on suspicion or mathematical assumptions alone.
ITAT Raipur held that alleged bogus purchases relating to a partnership firm could not be taxed protectively in the hands of one partner without direct linkage. The Tribunal upheld deletion of the Rs.1.92 crore addition made on protective basis.
