Tribunals and Commissions judgments

ITAT Dehradun reinforces that once a coordinate bench quashes a revisionary order under Section 263 of the Income Tax Act, the same order cannot be revived or re-exercised by the CIT(A). The ruling underscores judicial finality, preventing repetitive revisionary actions on identical grounds and protecting assessees from procedural harassment.

ITAT Ahmedabad rules that CSR donations, even if mandatory under the Companies Act, qualify for deduction under Section 80G if the donee institution is approved. The tribunal rejects the tax department's argument that such expenditures, being obligatory, cannot be treated as voluntary donations for tax benefits. This clarifies that compliance with statutory CSR obligations does not preclude eligibility for Chapter VI-A deductions.

ITAT Ahmedabad ruled that an assessee's non-participation in assessment proceedings does not forfeit the right to a fresh hearing, upholding natural justice principles. However, the Tribunal imposed costs for the assessee's procedural lapse, balancing fairness with accountability. The decision reinforces that ex-parte assessments under Section 144 IT Act can be set aside if the assessee's default was not willful or contumacious.

CESTAT Kolkata rules that grants received by cricket associations from BCCI for promoting cricket are not taxable consideration under service tax law. The tribunal upheld the exemption under the Mega Exemption Notification, setting a precedent that bundled sporting services funded by subsidies are not liable for service tax, benefiting sports bodies nationwide.

ITAT Dehradun rules that revisionary powers under Section 263 of the Income Tax Act cannot be invoked merely to substitute the Assessing Officer's opinion unless a material error is established. The Tribunal quashed the PCIT's order, emphasizing that the AO's acceptance of loan details after due inquiry cannot be overturned without evidence of prejudice to revenue or procedural lapse.

The Competition Commission of India ruled that mere dominance in the online ticketing market does not constitute abuse under Section 4 of the Competition Act unless there is evidence of market foreclosure or discriminatory conduct. The decision underscores that competitors must demonstrate anti-competitive effects, not just market share, to establish abuse of dominance.

ITAT Ahmedabad ruled that natural justice mandates restoring an appeal dismissed due to procedural negligence, provided the appellant pays costs. The decision reinforces that tax appeals cannot be dismissed ex-parte without affording a hearing, even in cases of oversight, balancing fairness with accountability for delays.

ITAT Dehradun quashed a penalty under Section 270A of the Income Tax Act, ruling that a show-cause notice must explicitly specify the charge of under-reporting or misreporting. The Tribunal held that levying a penalty on a different charge than the one initiated violates principles of natural justice, setting a precedent for strict procedural compliance in tax proceedings.

ITAT Ahmedabad rules that a mere agreement to purchase a residential property does not satisfy Section 54 exemption requirements; a registered conveyance deed is mandatory to claim capital gains tax relief. The ruling clarifies that taxpayers must ensure legal title transfer to avoid disallowance of exemptions, impacting property sellers relying on unregistered agreements.

CESTAT Mumbai rules that penalties against co-noticees under the Central Excise Rules cannot survive once the main noticee settles duty under the Sabka Vishwas (Legacy Dispute Resolution) Scheme, 2019. The judgment reinforces that co-noticee liability is derivative, offering relief to secondary parties in tax disputes.

CESTAT Ahmedabad rules that supplying water to vessels within port premises qualifies as a 'port service' under Section 65(82) of the Finance Act, 1994, making it liable for service tax even if characterized as a sale of goods. The ruling clarifies that reimbursement charges for such services attract tax obligations, impacting port operators and shipping entities.

ITAT Hyderabad rules that Section 12AB(4) of the Income Tax Act cannot be applied retrospectively to cancel charitable registration for prior assessment years. The tribunal emphasized judicial discipline, holding that lower authorities must follow higher judicial decisions even if they disagree, and cannot revisit settled issues without explicit legislative intent.

ITAT Ahmedabad ruled that an appellate order is void if it fails to address the assessee's grounds of appeal or written submissions, violating principles of natural justice. The tribunal emphasized that procedural compliance, including proper approval hierarchy under Section 151 of the IT Act, is mandatory for reassessment notices, setting aside the order for non-compliance.

CESTAT Kolkata rules that anti-dumping duty cannot be levied retrospectively for the period between the lapse of provisional duty and issuance of final duty, reinforcing WTO compliance and Section 9A of the Customs Tariff Act. This protects importers from unexpected financial burdens during assessment gaps.

The Central Administrative Tribunal, Cuttack, held that appointing a Presenting Officer with a history of personal enmity against the accused officer fundamentally undermines procedural fairness in disciplinary inquiries. This ruling reinforces that bias, even if not overtly malicious, invalidates proceedings regardless of administrative delays or pandemic-related disruptions, setting a critical precedent for public sector employment cases.

The ITAT Delhi has ruled that tax authorities cannot disallow business purchases under Section 37 of the Income Tax Act merely because e-way bills were not produced, if the assessee has provided credible documentary evidence including invoices, bank records, and supplier confirmations. This sets a critical precedent for taxpayers in the manufacturing and trading sectors, reinforcing that substantive proof of transaction legitimacy outweighs procedural compliance gaps under GST.

The ITAT Ahmedabad has struck down the arbitrary 20% disallowance of truck rent expenses, ruling that tax authorities cannot impose such adjustments without conducting a proper comparative analysis or invoking Section 133(6) to verify genuineness. This sets a critical precedent for transport businesses and SMEs facing mechanical tax adjustments, reinforcing that procedural fairness is non-negotiable even in scrutiny assessments.

ITAT Delhi rules that cash deposits during demonetization, backed by audited books of accounts and documented sales, cannot be treated as unexplained income under Section 68. The ruling reinforces that tax authorities must consider corroborative evidence before making additions, protecting businesses with compliant record-keeping.

The Central Administrative Tribunal holds that prolonged delay in deciding a teacher's transfer request on verified security grounds constitutes a violation of her Article 21 rights, compelling authorities to act within a fixed timeline. This ruling reinforces that public employers cannot treat humanitarian and safety concerns as discretionary when lives are at risk, setting a precedent for vulnerable government employees in conflict-affected regions.

The ITAT Delhi has ruled that alleged financial mismanagement under Section 13 of the Income Tax Act cannot be grounds for cancelling a charitable trust’s registration under Section 12AB. Only material deviation from the trust’s stated objects or lack of genuineness in its activities can trigger cancellation, reinforcing that procedural compliance alone does not override substantive purpose in charitable exemptions.

ITAT Delhi rules that reassessment proceedings under Section 148 of the Income Tax Act are invalid if the jurisdictional notice is merely uploaded on the e-filing portal without proof of actual service. The decision underscores that procedural compliance requires tangible delivery, not just digital record-keeping, affecting all pending and future reassessment cases.

ITAT Ahmedabad rules that an ex parte assessment under Section 69A of the IT Act cannot bar reassessment if the taxpayer provides credible evidence on appeal. The tribunal mandated a fresh hearing, reinforcing natural justice principles in tax proceedings and setting a precedent for taxpayers contesting unexplained income additions.

The Central Administrative Tribunal holds that administrative authorities cannot rely on ACRs previously set aside by court order to deny financial upgradation under the MACP Scheme, reinforcing that service benefits must be assessed on legally valid records alone. This protects public employees from retrospective penalization based on invalidated evaluations and strengthens the doctrine of consistency in administrative decision-making.

ITAT Delhi rules that notional interest recognized under IND AS cannot be taxed as income under Section 56 of the Income Tax Act. The tribunal also mandates acceptance of documentary evidence reconciling GST and P&L discrepancies if verified by the Assessing Officer, reinforcing the primacy of accounting standards over tax disputes.