ITAT Ahmedabad held that addition towards unsecured loan where loan was repaid is unsustainable, whereas, addition where assessee failed to demonstrate repayment or interest payment to creditor sustained.
ITAT Ahmedabad held that the revisionary jurisdiction under section 263 cannot be exercised to widen the scope of the original assessment beyond the specific reasons recorded for reopening the assessment.
ITAT Ahmedabad held that additional evidence reconciling the discrepancy in receipts as per Form No. 26AS and books of accounts were not submitted before AO or CIT(A). Accordingly, matter send back to CIT(A).
Where an agricultural land was sold to a non-agriculturist, the same did not loose its status as agricultural land and could not be classified as a capital assets.
ITAT Ahmedabad held that expenditure incurred on software project, which was sought to be developed however never came into existence and no new asset came into existence which would be of an enduring benefit to the assessee, are allowable as revenue in nature.
ITAT Ahmedabad held that additional interest under section 244A(1A) is applicable where there is a delay in granting the refund due to the assessee. Provisions of addition interest are effective prospectively from 01.06.2016.
ITAT Ahmedabad held that imposition of penalty u/s. 271(1)(c) of the Income Tax Act justified as deduction was claimed u/s. 54EC and 54F of the Income Tax Act by furnishing inaccurate particulars.
ITAT Ahmedabad held that initiation of reopening of assessment based on mere change of opinion and not taking into account the work-in-progress method of accounting followed by the assessee is unjustifiable and liable to be quashed.
ITAT Ahmedabad quashes reassessment of Specific Ceramics Ltd for FY 2008-09 due to non-issuance of mandatory notice under Section 143(2).
ITAT Ahmedabad ruled that an assessment is invalid if mandatory notice under Section 143(2) was not issued, highlighting Section 292BB’s limitations.
