ITAT Guwahati Judgments — January 2021

The Tribunal condoned the delay in filing the appeals, noting it was to facilitate the assessees' availing of the Direct Tax Vivad Se Vishwas Scheme. Consequently, the appeals were treated as withdrawn and dismissed.

The Tribunal condoned the delay in filing the appeals, specifically to allow the assessees to avail the Direct Tax Vivad Se Vishwas Scheme. Consequently, the Revenue's appeals were treated as withdrawn and dismissed.

The Tribunal condoned the delay in filing the appeals, noting it was to facilitate the assessees' availing of the Direct Tax Vivad Se Vishwas Scheme. Consequently, the appeals were treated as withdrawn and dismissed.

The Tribunal condoned the delay in filing the appeals, noting it was to facilitate the assessees' availing of the Direct Tax Vivad Se Vishwas Scheme. Consequently, the appeals were treated as withdrawn and dismissed.

The Tribunal held that since the assessee had commenced its project and the interest income was intrinsically linked to the business, the interest expenditure should be allowed. Consequently, only the net interest amount (interest received minus interest expenditure) should be brought to tax.

The Tribunal held that the statements from the broker's director and accountant were not incriminating against the assessee, did not specifically mention F&O transactions, and lacked corroboration. The AO failed to establish a nexus between the assessee's transactions and the alleged bogus activities.

The Tribunal held that since the assessee had commenced its project and the interest income was intrinsically linked to the business, the interest expenditure should be allowed. Consequently, only the net interest amount (interest received minus interest expenditure) should be brought to tax.

The Tribunal held that since the assessee had commenced its project and the interest income was intrinsically linked to the business, the interest expenditure should be allowed. Consequently, only the net interest amount (interest received minus interest expenditure) should be brought to tax.

The Tribunal held that the CIT(A) erred by not examining the assessee's reconciliation of the cash flow statement and dismissing it as an afterthought. The matter was remanded back to the AO for verification of the reconciliation.

The tribunal allowed the assessee to withdraw the appeal, noting that keeping it pending would be pointless. The assessee was granted liberty to recall the order if the scheme proposal was not accepted.

The Tribunal allowed the assessee to withdraw the appeal, noting that the Vivad Se Vishwas Scheme was opted for. The assessee was granted liberty to recall the order if the scheme proposal was not accepted.

The Tribunal allowed the assessee to withdraw the appeals. This was based on the assessee's successful opting for the Vivad Se Vishwas scheme for both assessment years.

The Tribunal allowed the assessee to withdraw the appeals. This was based on the assessee's successful opting for the Vivad Se Vishwas scheme for both assessment years.

The Tribunal allowed the assessee to withdraw the appeal, taking into consideration the assessee's opting for the Vivad Se Vishwas scheme and the issuance of Form 3 by the Department.

The Tribunal allowed the assessee to withdraw the appeal as the assessee had opted for the Vivad Se Vishwas Scheme. The assessee was given liberty to recall the order if the scheme proposal was not accepted.

The tribunal allowed the assessee to withdraw the appeal as the assessee had opted for the Vivad Se Vishwas Scheme. The assessee was granted liberty to recall the order if the scheme proposal was not accepted.

The Tribunal allowed the assessee to withdraw the appeal, noting that the Vivad Se Vishwas Scheme provided a way to settle the dispute. The assessee was granted liberty to recall the order if the scheme was not accepted.

The tribunal allowed the assessee to withdraw the appeal, noting that the Vivad Se Vishwas Scheme was opted for. The assessee was granted liberty to move for recalling the order if the scheme proposal was not accepted.

The tribunal allowed the assessee to withdraw the appeal as they had opted for the Vivad Se Vishwas Scheme. The withdrawal is subject to the scheme's acceptance by the competent authority.

The tribunal allowed the assessee to withdraw the appeal as they had opted for the Vivad Se Vishwas Scheme. The assessee was granted liberty to recall the order if the scheme proposal was not accepted.

The Tribunal found that the assessee's explanation involving a sister concern and new transaction types was introduced at a later stage. To ensure justice, the matter was remitted back to the AO for fresh verification of all submissions and documents.