ITAT Mumbai held that estimated rate of profit applied on the alleged non-genuine purchases doesnt amount to concealment of income or furnishing inaccurate particulars. Accordingly, penalty u/s 271(1)(c) of the Income Tax Act unsustainable.
ITAT held that ITR is a sacred document prescribed in law and reporting-error cannot be pleaded so lightly. The prescribed forms of ITR have suitable columns to furnish the details of cash-balance, this law procedure has been in statute for several years and nobody can dispute it.
It is trite law that No addition can be made in the hands of power of attorney holder and further revenue has not brought on record any material evidence indicating that ownership of the said land belongs to appellant assesse. Therefore, we hold that the assessment order is passed without jurisdiction.
ITAT Mumbai held that sales tax subsidy received by the assessee is capital receipt and does not come within definition of income under section 2(24) of the Income Tax Act, 1961 and when, a receipt is not a in the nature of income, it cannot form part of book profit u/s 115JB of the Income Tax Act, 1961.
ITAT Mumbai held that assessee has duly discharged identity, creditworthiness and genuineness of the transactions of receipt of share premium of Rs. 2.25 crore received from 19 share subscribers and hence addition towards unexplained cash credit u/s 68 is unsustainable.
ITAT Delhi held that a solitary opportunity of one day to respond to show cause notice is in negation of overriding principles of natural justice accordingly revisionary order passed u/s 263 is liable to be quashed and set aside.
ITAT Mumbai held that action of AO in disallowing 50% of the depreciation and maintenance charges on the sports car is unsustainable as sports car was owned and used for the purpose of business and AO failed to establish that the sports car was not used fully for the purpose of business.
ITAT Rajkot held that department cannot take away rights of the assessee just by inadvertent mistake committed by the assessee at the time of return filing.
ITAT Pune held that deduction under section 54B of the Income Tax Act is available only if the land was used for agricultural purpose in the immediate two preceding years. in absence of the same, deduction u/s 54B ineligible.
ITAT Pune held that addition u/s 68 of the Income Tax Act merely on the basis of presumption or suspicion without any corroborated evidence is unsustainable.
