ITAT Delhi quashes reassessment orders against three companies. The court ruled that an AO cannot rely solely on a retracted statement to initiate reopening proceedings.
ITAT Delhi deleted Rs.8 lakh penny stock addition u/s 68. AO relied only on Investigation Wing report. Tribunal rules addition cannot be made without independent verification.
ITAT Delhi reduced a Rs.11.47 lakh demonetization cash addition to Rs.47,000/− for a senior citizen. Cites Madras HC ruling limiting S. 115BBE rate to transactions after 01.04.2017.
The ITAT deleted all additions and the consequential penalty, dismissing the Revenue’s appeal. It upheld the CIT(A)’s deletion of ad-hoc bogus expense additions after verifying evidence under Rule 46A.
Delhi ITAT deleted additions for Marketing/Reservation fees and Travel Agent Commission (TACP) for Six Continents Hotels. The Tribunal ruled the receipts were not FTS/FIS under the India-USA DTAA, applying the rule of consistency.
Delhi ITAT deleted a ₹30.65 lakh cash deposit addition made under Section 69A during demonetization. The source was proven to be a gift from the deceased grandmother’s savings of previously taxed rental income, preventing double taxation.
): The ITAT set aside a penalty of ₹4.25 lakh levied under Section 271C for non-deduction of TDS. Citing the Supreme Court ruling in U.S. Technologies International Pvt. Ltd., the Tribunal held that Section 271C applies only to the failure to deduct, not the late remittance of already deducted tax.
Delhi ITAT deleted a Rs.1000 crore addition made under Section 68 based solely on an SFIO report alleging circular fund rotation. The Tribunal upheld reopening but limited the addition to estimated commission income, ensuring parity with group cases.
The ITAT ruled that a reassessment order passed in the name of a deceased assessee is a curable irregularity, not void ab initio, provided the initial Section 148 notice was validly issued during the assessee’s lifetime.
ITAT Ahmedabad upheld PCIT’s revisionary order, ruling that AO’s failure to disallow interest (Rs.44.51 lakh) on unsecured loans (Rs.92 lakh) already deemed unexplained was an erroneous and prejudicial’ omission, not merely a difference of opinion.
