The assessment order was framed in which the AO made certain additions in the hands of the assessee under Section 69A of the Act r.w.s. 115BBE of the Act amounting to Rs. 2,05,00,477/- as unexplained income of the assessee.
ITAT Ahmedabad imposed cost of Rs. 10,000 on the assessee due to non-compliance with the show cause notice and directed to restore the matter back to the file of Jurisdictional Assessing Officer.
ITAT Ahmedabad held that addition under section 69 of the Income Tax Act towards cash deposit in bank not justified since it is proved that cash was deposited out of the sale of agricultural land.
Without purchases, there would have been no sales. AO’s claim of inflated purchases to reduce tax liability was not substantiated, as all 10 transactions of diamond purchase and sale were documented with relevant details.
Thus, penalty is not warranted on issues where a substantial question of law exists, indicating that the matter is not free from doubt. Accordingly, we quash the penalty order under section 271(1) (c) of the Act.
The AO added excise duty and sales tax to the total turnover while excluding lease rent and other incomes, categorizing them as “Income from Other Sources” rather than “Business Income”.
ITAT Ahmedabad held that CIT(A) dismissed the appeal due to non-compliance of the opportunities granted to the assessee. Accordingly, cost of Rs. 10,000 imposed on the assessee and matter remanded back to CIT(A).
ITAT Ahmedabad held that registration to trust under section 12AB of the Income Tax Act granted since assessee demonstrated that exemption under section 11 of the Income Tax Act is not claimed. Accordingly, appeal allowed.
As a result, assessee was required to deduct TDS on payments made to Bemo. AO invoked Section 40(a)(i) for non-deduction of tax on Rs. 12,69,79,006, disallowing the deduction.
ITAT Ahmedabad remands case to CIT(E) for fresh hearing, citing lack of natural justice in ex-parte order on Masani Meldi Sadhana Foundation’s registration appeal.
