ITAT Chandigarh held that cash deposits during demonetization could not be treated as unexplained income since the amounts were recorded as sales turnover in the books and supported by VAT returns.
ITAT Chandigarh held that exemption under Section 54F cannot be denied merely because the assessee failed to deposit unutilised funds in the Capital Gain Account Scheme before the due date under Section 139(1). The Tribunal ruled that actual investment in a residential house within the prescribed period amounted to substantive compliance deserving liberal interpretation.
The Tribunal observed that earlier additions were primarily based on DRI show-cause notices without independent investigation by the Assessing Officer. Fresh adjudication was ordered after admission of subsequent customs findings.
PCIT had erroneously mixed up the scope of renewal proceedings with cancellation proceedings under Section 12AB(4). Further, Settlement Commission itself had accepted the charitable nature and genuineness of the assessee’s activities and PCIT (Central) was found to lack jurisdiction to adjudicate the issue of renewal/cancellation of registration.
ITAT Chandigarh ruled that general expenses could not be disallowed merely on suspicion or comparative increase without identifying defects in books or non-business expenditure. The Tribunal observed that the AO made the addition without proper examination of records.
The ITAT Chandigarh ruled that receipts from sale of fly ash constituted taxable business income as they arose directly from the assessees power generation activity. The Tribunal held that subsequent credit to a statutory fund amounted only to application of income.
The ITAT Chandigarh held that additions under Section 68 could not be sustained where the Assessing Officer failed to conduct independent inquiry or verification of creditors. The Tribunal deleted additions relating to sundry creditors and business transactions supported by documents and banking records.
The Tribunal held that lack of inquiry into a large receipt justified revision under Section 263. It found the assessment erroneous and prejudicial to revenue. The ruling reinforces duty of proper verification.
The Tribunal set aside orders where the assessee failed to appear and granted another opportunity. It emphasized adherence to natural justice while imposing a cost.
The Tribunal deleted purchase disallowances after noting invoices, transport records, weighbridge slips, tax returns and bank payments supported actual procurement and use of materials in infrastructure projects.
