Tribunal held that an assessee cannot be penalized for delay caused by professional negligence of counsel, following Supreme Court precedent in Rafiq v. Munshilal, and remanded the case for verification of double addition due to audit reporting error.
The ITAT Ahmedabad rules that an assessment framed on a dissolved firm is not automatically void if the Assessing Officer (AO) was not notified of the dissolution. The case, Krishna Enterprise Vs ITO, involved a firm dissolved in 2016, a subsequent ex-parte assessment, and issues of non-compliance and alleged double taxation, leading to the matter being restored for re-adjudication.
The ITAT Mumbai ruled in ACIT Vs Deluxe Recycling India Private Limited that the increase in the safe harbour limit from 5% to 10% for the difference between stamp duty value and actual consideration under Section 56(2)(x) is curative and retrospective. The Tribunal dismissed the Revenue’s appeal, deleting an addition, and restored the issues of depreciation and rent disallowance to the Assessing Officer for de novo verification.
ITAT Kolkata sets aside ₹1.86 Cr tax addition, ruling that CIT(A) must pass a reasoned order on merits and cannot merely uphold the AO’s view or dismiss an appeal for non-compliance.
ITAT Pune deletes ₹14 lakh cash deposit addition during demonetization, ruling that retaining cash from duly accounted sources for a long period is not grounds for suspicion.
Mumbai ITAT restored Discover Ekam Foundation’s Section 12AB registration matter to the CIT(E). Rejection, based on overseas fund use, will be re-adjudicated considering the trust’s revised Memorandum of Association.
ITAT Delhi held that a Local Authority providing general public utility services is not required to maintain books under Section 44AA. The penalty under Section 271A for non-maintenance of books was deleted.
ITAT Agra condones a 3-year, 5-month delay in a non-profit’s tax appeal, applying the Supreme Court’s COVID-19 limitation exclusion. The appeal is restored for a decision on merits.
ITAT Mumbai sends a lakh partner remuneration disallowance case back to AO for re-verification. The disallowance hinged on classifying property sale profit as capital gain.
The ITAT Mumbai set aside a reassessment for A.Y. 2017-18, ruling that the mandatory prior approval for a notice issued after three years must come from the PCCIT, not the PCIT. Citing Bombay HC precedents, the Tribunal deemed the order a legal nullity.
