The Tribunal upheld 200% penalty under Section 270A for misreporting income through ineligible deductions. Admitted incorrect claims were treated as conscious misrepresentation, not a bonafide error.
The Tribunal held that cash received at the time of executing a registered sale deed does not fall within the definition of “specified sum” under Section 269SS. Since the provision primarily targets advances in property transactions, penalty under Section 271D was unsustainable.
The Tribunal noted that the AO reopened the case under the mistaken belief that no scrutiny assessment had been made. Such factual error and absence of new incriminating material vitiated the assumption of jurisdiction under Section 147.
The AO recorded reasons for escapement without receiving confirmation from the Sub-Registrar. ITAT ruled that absence of tangible evidence vitiated reassessment, making the subsequent Section 263 revision unsustainable.
The ruling emphasized that tax authorities must gather evidence instead of relying on coerced admissions. Additions made purely on surrender statements were struck down for violating CBDT guidelines.
The Tribunal emphasized that assumptions based on common names cannot justify major tax additions. Without documentary linkage or banking trail confirmation, the Revenue’s case could not stand.
The case involved alleged bogus job-work transactions linked to a third party. The Tribunal found the receipts were genuine business income duly audited and taxed, leading to deletion of additions.
The Tribunal ruled that Section 263 cannot be invoked merely because the Commissioner holds a different opinion. Once adequate inquiry is conducted and a reasonable view is taken, revision is unsustainable.
ITAT held that entire purchases cannot be disallowed when sales and stock are accepted. The addition was rightly restricted to 25% to cover possible inflation.
Once the Tribunal ruled that foreign salary was not taxable in India, consequential additions for alleged unexplained investments and deposits were also deleted. The appeal was allowed in full.
