The ITAT held that Section 68 could not be applied to sale proceeds received from investments already recorded in the books in an earlier year. While the reassessment was upheld, the additions towards alleged accommodation entries and commission were deleted.
The ITAT Delhi held that although failure to file Form 10B disentitled the assessee from claiming exemption under Sections 11 and 12, the entire gross receipts could not be taxed where the expenditure was incurred for charitable purposes. The Tribunal upheld deduction of expenditure while denying the statutory exemption.
The ITAT Delhi held that the Revenue could not substitute the assessee’s consistent method of revenue recognition with the Percentage of Completion Method for only one assessment year. It deleted the profit estimation made on work-in-progress.
The ITAT Delhi held that cash deposits representing recorded business sales could not be treated as unexplained under Section 68 when the books of account and trading results had been accepted. It deleted the addition relating to demonetisation cash deposits.
The ITAT Delhi held that an adjustment against excess contributions already made to an approved gratuity fund could not be disallowed under Section 40A(7). It also held that contributions to an approved gratuity fund are allowable under Section 40A(7)(b), resulting in deletion of the disallowance.
ITAT Delhi restored the penalty proceedings to the Assessing Officer after noting that the related quantum appeal had already been remanded for de novo adjudication. The Tribunal held that the penalty should also be reconsidered in accordance with law.
The Tribunal ruled that recording satisfaction in the assessment order is mandatory before initiating penalty under Section 271D. In the absence of such satisfaction, the penalties were deleted.
The ITAT held that assessments under Section 153A were invalid because no search warrant was issued in the assessee’s name. As the foundational assessment was void, the consequential Section 263 revision orders were also quashed.
The ITAT Delhi held that cash claimed as marriage gifts could not be accepted where the assessee failed to explain why it remained with him long after the marriage. The Tribunal sustained the addition relating to the Shagun amount.
The ITAT held that reassessment proceedings were invalid because the Revenue failed to provide the mandatory approval under Section 151 despite repeated requests under the RTI Act. The Tribunal ruled that such procedural non-compliance violated natural justice and rendered the reassessment void ab initio.
