Delhi ITAT dismissed Revenue’s appeal, ruling final assessment on non-resident Sneh Sharma void for AO’s failure to issue mandatory draft assessment order under Section 144C.
The ITAT Raipur set aside penalties under Section 271(1)(c) levied on Sai Baba Sansthan for A.Y. 2012-13 and 2013-14, remanding the matter to the NFAC. The Tribunal held that the penalty’s survival is contingent upon the NFAC upholding the quantum additions on a de novo adjudication, relying on Supreme Court and Delhi High Court precedents.
ITAT Delhi quashes reassessment (AY 2016-17) and deletes Rs.2.25 Cr LTCG addition after finding that PCIT, not PCCIT, gave the required Section 151 approval.
ITAT confirmed GP and unsecured loan additions but deleted expense disallowances, ruling that rebates and receipt-backed rent are valid business expenses without a proven personal element.
ITAT Delhi upholds the Rs. 1 crore addition (u/s 68) confirmed by CIT(A), dismissing the assessees appeal due to its repeated failure to produce evidence for the genuineness, identity, and creditworthiness of the purported loan. No evidence, no relief.
ITAT Delhi upholds the quashing of s. 153C assessment for AY 2012-13, ruling it’s beyond the 10-year block of limitation as per s. 153A/C and Delhi High Court precedent in Ojjus Medicare.
Jaipur ITAT dismisses Revenue’s appeals in Nath Corporation, Royal Jewellers, and Shri Jitendra Kumar Agarwal cases, deleting Rs. 3.3 crore in penalties.
ITAT Delhi rules wife not liable to prove husband and sons’ source of funds for property purchase. Addition of Rs.1.10 Cr u/s 69 quashed as family funds explained.
Sanjay Garg Vs DCIT (ITAT Delhi) Assessee challenged assessments framed u/s 153A r.w.s. 143(3) on the ground that mandatory approval u/s 153D was granted mechanically without proper application of mind. AO had made an addition of Rs.50,00,000/- as unexplained money u/s 69, which was confirmed by CIT(A)-24, New Delhi vide order dated 28.02.2025. Before Tribunal, […]
The Tribunal held that an addition cannot be sustained on the basis of a PAN mismatch alone, especially when the assessee, an individual with no business activity, was wrongly linked to a corporate entity.
