Assessee challenged CIT(A) order before the Bangalore Bench of ITAT arguing that 1450 grams of gold should not be considered unexplained as it fell within the permissible limits of CBDT Instruction No. 1916.
ITAT Bangalore held that addition under section 68 of the Income Tax Act towards unexplained money send back for de novo reassessment due to difference in amounts and unclear information.
ITAT Bangalore held that rejection of exemption u/s. 11 of the Income Tax Act due to non-appearance of form 10B in e-filing portal unjustified as form was already filed but was not appearing in e-filing portal. Matter remanded for fresh consideration.
ITAT Bangalore held that approval given under section 153D of the Income Tax Act at the fag end of assessment in a mechanical manner and without application of mind is invalid and bad in law.
As per the AO, the impugned payment in cash exceeding the specified limit was not allowable as deduction and accordingly the AO disallowed the same under the provisions of section 40A(3) of the Act and added to the total income of the assessee.
ITAT Bangalore deletes penalty under Section 270A on IIFL Samasta Finance Limited. Key issues included Provident Fund contributions and education cess claims.
ITAT Bangalore held that granting an opportunity to cross examine essential when addition is made on the basis of 3rd party statements. Non-granting any opportunity of cross examination violates the principle of natural which vitiates the validity of addition.
ITAT Bangalore deleted addition made under section 69A of the Income Tax Act towards unexplained money after examining the cash withdrawn and cash deposit amounts, since cash withdrawn is more than cash deposit.
ITAT Bangalore held that hearing notices sent by CIT(A) was not received by the assessee since notices were sent to old auditor’s email ID. Thus, non-appearance was neither wilful nor wanton hence ex-parte order of CIT(A) set aside.
Considering the judgment of Alnavar Credit Souharda Co-op Ltd noted above the AO is directed to decide the issue afresh regarding the claim of deduction made by the assessee.
