ITAT Mumbai ruled that government incentives to promote industrial development in disaster-hit Kutch and modernization under TUF scheme are capital receipts. Revenue’s appeal was dismissed, reaffirming purpose test from Ponni Sugars and Sahney Steel.
The case addressed the disallowance of Rs.2.21 Cr on dealer foreign tour expenses, which the AO questioned for lack of formal agreements. The ITAT confirmed the deletion of the addition, ruling the expenses were genuine business promotion and commercially expedient under S 37(1) particularly since a similar scheme was accepted for the holding company.
ITAT Hyderabad held that deduction claimed under section 43B of the Income Tax Act supported by necessary documentary evidences is allowable. Accordingly, deduction allowed to the extent relevant evidences are furnished.
The case addressed a Rs.605 Cr addition under Section 68 for alleged bogus sales, where the AO didn’t reject the books. The ITAT remanded the matter, directing the AO to recompute income by applying the average three-year Gross Profit rate on sales, establishing that entire sales cannot be taxed as unexplained credits when books aren’t rejected.
ITAT Mumbai held that reopening of assessment under section 147 of the Income Tax Act on the basis of third party statement substantiated with tangible material is justifiable. Accordingly, matter restored back to CIT(A) with liberty to assessee to place supporting documents explaining source of cash deposits.
ITAT Lucknow held that cash deposits during demonetization period cannot be treated as unexplained credit since the same is made out of cash sales. Accordingly, addition merely on suspicion, doubt, conjecture and guess work cannot be sustained.
ITAT Mumbai held that capital gains cannot be treated as unaccounted income under section 68 of the Income Tax Act since AO nowhere proved that assessee himself was involved in price rigging of any of the scrips. Accordingly, appeal of assessee stands allowed.
ITAT quashes an income tax addition for cash deposits, ruling that a detailed documentary trail explaining the source for visa purposes cannot be dismissed solely by a third party’s denial.
ITAT ruled that interest on loans cannot be disallowed when the AO accepts the loan principal is genuine by dropping an addition proposed under Section 68 of the Act. which deleted a Rs 3 lakh interest disallowance after the tax officer admitted the underlying loans were genuine.
ITAT Delhi quashed a reassessment, ruling that jurisdictional AO lacked authority to issue a Section 148 notice after CBDT notification assigned exclusive power to NFAC under Section 151A. The key takeaway is that post-March 29, 2022, only NFAC can validly initiate reassessment proceedings under faceless regime.
