‘Gupt Daan’,a secret gift regarding unexplained cash in a Religious Trust locker was pertaining to RNB Temple Trust and was already brought on record to the extent of Rs.1,79,00,000/- which was evident from the Balance Sheet submitted.
ITAT Ahmedabad held that addition under section 68 towards cash credits not justified since evidences clearly demonstrates that cash deposits and credit entries are through agricultural income. Accordingly, addition deleted and appeal allowed.
Held that no opportunity was allowed to the assessee by the Ld. CIT(A) (NFAC) before passing this ex-parte order. Thus, the order passed by the CIT(A) is in gross violation to the principle of natural justice.
ITAT Surat held that addition under section 68 of the Income Tax Act deleted since appellant has satisfactorily explained the nature and source of the credit. Accordingly, appeal allowed and addition deleted.
ITAT Delhi held that the interest on compensation or on enhanced compensation cannot be considered as compensation and shall be chargeable to tax under the head income from other sources. Accordingly, appeal dismissed.
ITAT Mumbai held that reopening of assessment under section 148 of the Income Tax Act beyond 3 years liable to be quashed as escaped income is less than INR 50,00,000. Thus, notice issued u/s. 148 quashed.
Search action was carried out on residential premises of assessee. Several incriminating documents were found and seized. Assessee was issued with notice to file Income Tax Return and seeking details for seven assessment years within 5 days.
ITAT Bangalore held that non-granting of accumulation of income under section 11(2) due to delay in filing Form 10 not justified since delay was condoned by appropriate authority. Accordingly, appeal allowed in favour of assessee.
It was submitted of behalf of assessee that the appeal filed by the Revenue is hit by recently issued CBDT Circular No.09 of 2024 dated 17.09.2024 revising the previous thresholds pertaining to tax effects.
In the matter abovementioned ITAT Delhi vitiated penalty proceedings after examining that non mentioning of charge for which penalty is to be levied makes the notice as much defective as non striking of irrelevant clauses in the notice.
