1770 Tribunals and Commissions judgments explained in plain English: what was decided, the law applied and why it matters. Page 65 of 74.
ITAT Pune holds that inadvertent filing under wrong subsection of Section 12A is a curable procedural defect, not a ground for rejection, reinforcing procedural fairness in tax exemptions.
ITAT Nagpur holds that where a loan is received and repaid through banking channels in the same financial year, Section 68 additions are unsustainable even if lender is a paper entity.
NGT holds that government land classified as 'gap area' and assigned to ex-servicemen does not trigger Public Trust Doctrine unless formally notified as forest or common resource.
ITAT Indore holds that Section 249(4)(b) does not apply when no taxable income exists, rendering advance tax payment unnecessary for appeal maintainability in reassessment cases.
CAT Allahabad holds that reinstatement under Section 17-B IDA requires full regularisation, not daily wage engagement. Key precedent for public sector employment disputes.
ITAT Delhi holds that search-based assessments must be framed under Section 153A, not Section 143(3), when the last panchnama is dated in the subsequent financial year.
ITAT Delhi holds that charitable trusts with mixed objectives including religious activities retain 80G eligibility if such activities are not wholly or substantially religious in nature.
ITAT Delhi holds that notice under Section 148 is time-barred if issued beyond the surviving period computed from the assessee's reply to the show-cause notice under Rajeev Bansal.
ITAT Delhi holds that consolidated approval under Section 153D for multiple assessment years is invalid; each year requires independent sanction with application of mind.
CAT holds that withholding retirement gratuity for unvacated railway quarters is invalid if the accommodation was condemned and uninhabitable; damage rent limited to last meter reading.
The National Green Tribunal emphasizes that environmental clearances cannot be finalized without verified compliance with all Stage-I conditions, reinforcing procedural rigor under EIA Notification 2006.
ITAT Delhi holds that cash found in a spouse's locker cannot be added to assessee's income under Section 69A without independent evidence linking it to him.
ITAT Delhi holds that where sales from alleged bogus purchases are accepted, full disallowance under Section 69C is unjustified; addition must be restricted to a reasonable proportion.
CAT Allahabad holds that courts cannot reappreciate evidence in service disciplinary cases; interference permitted only for natural justice violations or no-evidence findings.
ITAT Delhi quashes reassessment notice issued beyond surviving limitation period under Section 148, following Rajeev Bansal. Key takeaway for tax practitioners.
The CESTAT holds that Rule 26(2) penalties under the Central Excise Rules, 2002 apply only to natural persons, not corporate entities, reinforcing the principle of personal culpability in tax evasion.
ITAT Delhi clarifies that Section 68 additions require substantive explanation of cash deposit sources during demonetization; mere surmise insufficient. Tax cannot be levied under Section 115BBE for pre-2017 transactions.
The Tribunal holds that revenue must prove delivery of orders via Speed Post with acknowledgment; mere dispatch is insufficient to trigger limitation period.
ITAT Delhi holds that failure to appear before CIT(A) in search assessment cases does not justify ex parte orders; remand with cost imposition ensures fair adjudication.
The CETAT holds that allegations of clandestine removal under the Central Excise Act cannot be sustained on third-party records alone; corroborative evidence is mandatory.
ITAT Delhi holds that notice under Section 148 issued on 27-07-2022 for A.Y. 2015-16 is time-barred under Section 149, following Union of India v. Rajeev Bansal. Assessment quashed.
The CETAT holds that customs authorities cannot demand duty or impose penalties under Section 28AAA unless DGFT has first cancelled export incentive scrips. Key precedent for exporters and brokers.
ITAT Delhi holds that unsigned, unwitnessed agreement to sell recovered during search lacks evidentiary value for adding unaccounted cash income under Section 153C.
ITAT Delhi holds that revenue must substantiate allegations of shell entities; mere suspicion cannot override credible evidence produced by assessee under Section 69A.