ITAT Bangalore remands Sardar Imtiyaz Pasha’s appeal to AO, citing unfair profit estimation and denial of fair hearing by CIT(A). Case sent back for fresh review of cash deposits.
ITAT Jaipur held that addition towards unexplained money under section 69A of the Income Tax Act merely on the basis of statement which was subsequently retracted is not sustainable in law. Accordingly, addition is directed to be deleted.
ITAT Mumbai under Resale Price Method [RPM] focus is more on same or similar nature of products rather than similarity of products. Thus, TPO directed to include 5 companies as comparable for benchmarking international transaction.
ITAT Delhi held that addition under section 69A of the Income Tax Act towards cash deposited during demonetization cannot be sustained as source of cash deposited is cash sales and the same is already offered to tax. Accordingly, the appeal is allowed and addition is deleted.
ITAT Delhi held that granting of single approval under section 153D of the Income Tax Act for difference assessment years and that too mechanically without application of mind is not sustainable. Accordingly, entire proceedings initiated u/s. 153C quashed.
The ITAT Delhi ruled reassessment notices issued to a dissolved firm, Ganesh Commodity Brokers, were invalid as they were not served on former partners as per Section 283(2) of the Income Tax Act.
ITAT Hyderabad held that reference to special audit u/sec.142(2A) of the Act dated 31.12.2018 without satisfying the conditions provided therein, is arbitrary, illegal and void abinitio. Accordingly, final assessment order is quashed.
ITAT Delhi held that registration granted under section 12A of the Income Tax Act cannot be cancelled with retrospective effect as the concept of ‘specified violations’ u/s. 12AB(4) is effective only from 1st April 2022. Accordingly, order retrospectively cancelling registration quashed.
ITAT Mumbai held that set off of loss of Permanent Establishment [PE] against the interest income received from External Commercial Borrowing, on which benefit of concessional rate tax availed, is allowable. Accordingly, appeal allowed to that extent.
ITAT Agra held that property purchased, being four shops at ground floor and one room at first floor, was predominantly commercial in nature and hence disqualifies for exemption under section 54 of the Income Tax Act. Hence, appeal dismissed.
