#income tax appeals

ITAT Mumbai rules that while disallowance of commission expenditure under Section 37(1) of the IT Act is valid on merits, the same amount cannot be taxed again in a subsequent assessment year, reinforcing the bar on double taxation. This holding protects taxpayers from punitive reassessments where income was already disclosed and taxed.

The ITAT Ranchi restored assessment proceedings to the Assessing Officer after finding the denial of a fair hearing violated natural justice, but imposed a Rs. 10,000 cost per appeal on the assessee for deliberate non-cooperation despite repeated notices. This sets a clear precedent that procedural fairness must be upheld, but willful obstruction in tax litigation carries financial consequences.

ITAT Ranchi sets aside ex-parte dismissal orders in income tax appeals, ruling that failure to provide an opportunity to be heard violates principles of natural justice. The Tribunal directs fresh adjudication, emphasizing procedural fairness in tax proceedings and assessee rights to present evidence.

ITAT Ahmedabad condones delays of over 1,000 days in tax appeals due to medical emergencies, holding that 'sufficient cause' under Section 249(3) of the IT Act includes severe health crises. The ruling reinforces that substantial justice prevails over procedural defaults, offering relief to taxpayers facing similar hardships.

ITAT Ahmedabad rules that reassessment under Section 147 is invalid if initiated after the merger of the original assessment with the CIT(A) order, unless there is a failure to disclose material facts. The ruling reinforces procedural safeguards against arbitrary reassessment, impacting tax litigation strategy for government and corporate assessees.

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.