Section 250(4) of the Income Tax Act

The appellate tribunal must render a proper decision on both facts and law, disposing of an appeal on its merits rather than dismissing it solely due to the appellant's absence. This obligation is derived from Section 33(4) of the Income Tax Act, 1922, and reflects principles of natural justice.

The ITAT fails to uphold natural justice when it doesn't address an infirmity regarding an assessee being denied a proper opportunity of being heard before the CIT(Appeals)/NFAC dismissed the matter ex-parte.

The transformation of bulk powder into regulated, consumable capsules constitutes manufacturing under the definition provided in various statutes, qualifying for associated tax benefits and deductions.

When two special acts conflict, the later act generally prevails, unless the dominant purpose of the earlier act is covered by the contingency in question, in which case the earlier act may prevail.

A provision for gratuity made on the basis of actuarial valuation is a revenue expenditure and allowable as a deduction in computing book profits for the purposes of section 115JB.

The Commissioner (Appeals) is obliged to give the assessing officer an opportunity to examine evidence called for under Rule 46A(4), even if the evidence was not filed by the assessee on its own.

An assessment under Section 153A does not mandatorily require a notice under Section 143(2).

The assessee has a right to inspect reports and documents relevant to their assessment and to present evidence in rebuttal, aligning with principles of natural justice.

The Delhi High Court allowed deduction under Section 80JJAA even if the claim was made during assessment proceedings, provided the claim was otherwise sustainable in law.

Giving an advance to a builder for the construction of a house is considered equivalent to construction for the purpose of claiming deduction under section 54F.