ITAT Bangalore held that when the reasons supplied to the assessee and the reasons supplied before higher forum is not verbatim same, it cannot sustain the validity of reopening of assessment under section 147 of the Income Tax Act.
ITAT Chandigarh dismissed the appeals filed by the revenue since the tax effect involved in the same is less than prescribed monetary limit of Rs. 60 lacs in terms of the CBDT Circular No.09/2024 dated 17.09.2024.
ITAT Delhi held that addition under section 69 of the Income Tax Act on protective basis not justified since assessee established genuineness of transaction and creditworthiness of entity from which share application money is received.
ITAT Ahmedabad held that addition towards entire cash deposits during demonetization period by passing ex-parte order due to non-compliance by assessee without examining on merits unjustified. Accordingly, matter restored back to AO for fresh examination.
The present appeal is preferred by the revenue. The only issue in this appeal of the Revenue is against the order of CIT(A) deleting addition made by the AO towards unexplained expenditure u/s.69C of the Act in respect of trade payable settled outside books of accounts.
CIT(A) partly allowed the appeal and directed the AO to re-compute the “Income From Other Sources” after deducting the amount of Rs 24,25,426/-u/s 57(iii) of the Act. Being aggrieved, the present appeal is filed.
ITAT Mumbai held that Goods and Services Tax (GST) amount while computing presumptive income under section 44B of the Income Tax Act cannot be included. Thus, issue decided in favour of assessee.
Appellant has preferred the present appeal. The solitary issue that is raised is whether CIT(A) is justified in confirming the addition of Rs.35,13,000/- as unexplained money by invoking the provisions of section 69A of the Act.
ITAT Mumbai deleted additions made under section 43CA of the Income Tax Act by considering the stamp duty value on the date of registration of agreement as prescribed under section 43CA(3) of the Income Tax Act.
We have to examine delay as excessive or inordinate based on whether there is a reasonable cause for not filing the appeal on time by the assessee and in our view when there is a reasonable cause, the period of delay may not be relevant factor.
