Section 263 cannot be invoked without substantial grounds, particularly when the AO has followed due process during the assessment.
ITAT Ahmedabad grants stay of tax recovery in Siddhi Parag Patel vs ITO case. The dispute centers on unexplained land investments and tax demand revisions.
ITAT Ahmedabad rules that Section 50C applies to sellers, not buyers, and clarifies the retrospective effect of Section 56(2)(vii)(b) on property transactions.
ITAT Ahmedabad held that interest income earned from deposits with Cooperative Banks shall be allowed as deduction u/s 80P(2)(d) of the Income Tax Act.
Jay Bhavani Mata Trust withdrew its appeal after successful registration under Section 12A. ITAT Ahmedabad dismissed the appeal as withdrawn.
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.
