ITAT Delhi sets aside CIT(A)’s ex-parte order against Sandha & Associates due to lack of notice, restoring the appeal.
ITAT Mumbai deletes penalty under Section 271(1)(c), stating no deliberate concealment and distinguishing case from precedent in Mak Data ruling.
ITAT Hyderabad partially upholds AO’s addition for unexplained cash deposit by Shri Balineni Kishore Babu, confirming ₹48,000 due to lack of source proof.
ITAT Pune upholds exemption under Sections 11 and 12, ruling that technical errors in form submission don’t justify denial for registered charitable trusts.
ITAT Ahmedabad held that addition u/s. 69A towards unexplained money [on-money transaction] simply on the basis of presumptions without any concrete evidence is liable to be deleted. Accordingly, addition u/s. 69A deleted as it lacks a valid basis.
ITAT Kolkata held that re-assessment proceedings initiated under section 148 of the Income Tax Act without any tangible material and without independent application of mind is not sustainable in law. Accordingly, reassessment is quashed.
The assessee company, engaged in the business of real estate, having multiple ongoing projects of construction and also selling upon the plots of land. The case of the assessee was selected for scrutiny assessment through CASS.
ITAT Delhi held that mere confession of accused cannot be a ground for conviction since the same is not supported by credible evidence on records. Accordingly, addition under section 69 of the Income Tax Act deleted.
ITAT Surat imposed cost of Rs. 10,000 on the applicant for non-furnishing of requisite details post application for registration filed in Form No.10AB. Accordingly, matter remanded back to the file of CIT(E).
ITAT Mumbai held that PCIT is empowered to issue a show- cause notice and pass a revision order u/s. 263 of the Act when reassessment order passed by AO was quite cryptic. Accordingly, order of PCIT upheld and appeal of assessee dismissed.