The Tribunal highlighted that non-receipt of assessment notice and lack of knowledge about tax procedures justified the 175-day delay. The appeal was restored to the AO, ensuring the assessee is given proper opportunity to present his case.
ITAT Amritsar ruled that accepting demonetised currency beyond the permitted date does not ipso facto create unexplained income under Section 69A. The assessee’s cash sales were already included in gross turnover, so no further addition was justified.
The Tribunal set aside the prior order as the deceased assessee could not represent himself and legal heirs were not on record. CIT(A) is directed to consider all issues afresh, including denial of indexed cost and 54F exemption.
The ITAT held that the AO’s allowance of an 80G deduction without examining the background of M/s. Aadhar Foundation was erroneous. The decision reinforces that Explanation-2 to Section 263 requires verification when there is material indicating possible bogus donations.
The tribunal ruled that ignoring a valid adjournment request vitiates ex-parte assessment and appellate orders. The is that fair opportunity is mandatory before deciding tax disputes.
ITAT Raipur remands bogus purchase disallowance for a rice miller, awaiting the High Court’s ruling. The case will be reconsidered de novo following legal principles once HC decides.
Revenue challenged deletions of additions in a scrutiny assessment, highlighting procedural lapses under Rule 46A. Tribunal remitted the matter for fresh adjudication considering additional evidence filed by the assessee.
The Tribunal upheld CIT(A)’s deletion of Rs. 10,00,059/- as the addition was based solely on uncorroborated third-party information. No primary evidence linked the assessee to the alleged accommodation entries.
Tribunal rules that procedural delay in filing Form 10B does not bar exemption under sections 11 and 12, following Supreme Court guidance on procedural lapses.
ITAT quashed a reassessment under section 147 as the AO failed to issue the mandatory notice under section 143(2), rendering the assessment legally invalid.
