Topic
The ITAT Mumbai held that conditioning registration under Sections 12AB/80G on a pending SLP is ultra vires. It directed the Commissioner to issue an unconditional order 1 April 2026 for Trust, stating tax exemptions cannot depend on Supreme Court appeals.
ITAT Ahmedabad ruled that bank credits alone do not prove unexplained investment under Section 69 without asset identification. It deleted the ₹1.28 crore addition and penalty, stressing that credits must be tied to specific assets.
The Kolkata ITAT ruled that the 10 % tolerance under Section 50C is retrospective, striking down the ₹9,94,312 addition for AY 2014-15 because the valuation gap was only 8.5 %. Taxpayers can therefore rely on the tolerance limit for past years, limiting exposure to Section 50C additions when the gap falls within the prescribed range.
The ITAT held that the Transfer Pricing Officer’s ad-hoc valuation method violated Section 92C and set aside the Rs 357.35 crore adjustment. The ruling reinforces that only the prescribed five methods may be used, affecting taxpayers facing TP adjustments.
Delhi ITAT quashed a Rs 9.70 million transfer-pricing addition, holding that a zero arm’s-length price for intra-group management and support services breaches transfer-pricing rules. Taxpayers must demonstrate a tangible benefit to justify pricing. The ruling affects firms using NIL-price intra-group services under the Income Tax Act.
ITAT Delhi allowed Section 80G deduction for CSR donations to registered entities, ruling that the Section 37(1) bar on deducting CSR spend as business expense does not preclude a separate charitable deduction. The bench followed multiple coordinate rulings to restore double tax relief for companies routing mandatory CSR contributions through eligible donees.
ITAT Delhi dismisses an appeal filed by a purported legal representative, ruling that mere claim of representation is insufficient without proof of succession or management of the deceased’s estate under Section 159. The appellant must satisfy statutory conditions or face departmental proceedings to proceed.
The ITAT Bangalore has set aside a CIT(A) order for violating natural justice by dismissing an appeal without examining the assessee’s written submissions or evidence, reinforcing that appellate authorities must engage with arguments presented - not merely rubber-stamp assessments. This ruling protects taxpayers from summary rejections and mandates reasoned appellate decision-making under the Income Tax Act.