The Tribunal held that denial of cross-examination of the third party, whose documents were relied upon, violates principles of natural justice. Such procedural lapse renders additions under section 69B legally invalid.
The Tribunal held that deduction under section 80-IA cannot be allowed mechanically based on past relief. Each infrastructure project must be independently examined to determine whether it qualifies as development or is merely a works contract.
The ITAT ruled that reassessment under section 153C cannot extend beyond the statutory six assessment years. Jurisdiction assumed outside this period was held void.
The Tribunal reaffirmed that satisfaction must be recorded contemporaneously or immediately after the searched person’s assessment. Any belated recording invalidates the assumption of jurisdiction under section 153C.
ITAT Rajkot held that there is no escapement of income or loss of revenue since tax paid on the basis of consolidated profit of both the partnership firm and hence reassessment proceedings are not sustainable. Accordingly, appeal of revenue is dismissed.
The Tribunal ruled that after primary evidence is furnished, the assessee is not required to prove the source of source under section 68, especially where the AO fails to conduct enquiry u/s 131 or 133(6).
The Tribunal deleted additions holding that expenses incurred on behalf of an employer company and recorded in its books cannot be assessed in the employee’s personal assessment.
The Tribunal held that the first appellate authority has no power to dismiss an appeal merely for non-appearance and must adjudicate issues on merits under section 250(6).
The Tribunal held that an assessment completed without issuing notice under section 143(2) is void ab initio. Non-participation by the assessee cannot cure this jurisdictional defect.
The Tribunal upheld deletion of unsecured loan additions where the appellate authority independently examined lender details. The key takeaway is that CIT(A) can call for and rely on necessary evidence to decide appeals on merits.
