ITAT Chandigarh held that initiation of revisionary proceeding under section 263 of the Income Tax Act for non-verification of notional interest cannot be justified since notional interest is not liable to be taxed in current year but is taxable only upon maturity hence there cannot be any evasion of tax.
The Tribunal examined whether agricultural land qualified as a non-capital asset and upheld taxation after finding it within the prescribed municipal distance. The ruling reiterates that physical verification and reliable evidence prevail over unsupported certificates.
The ITAT held that cash redeposited after a clearly documented bank withdrawal cannot be treated as unexplained. The ruling emphasizes that verifiable fund movement defeats section 69A additions.
The Tribunal held that purchases supported by invoices, e-way bills, banking payments, and valid GST registration at the time of supply cannot be treated as bogus. Subsequent GST cancellation and non-response by suppliers were held insufficient to justify disallowance.
The ITAT corrected its earlier order after noting that the liberty to reopen completed assessments under sections 147/148 was omitted. The ruling clarifies that absence of incriminating material bars search additions but not lawful reassessment.
The Tribunal held that income assessment issues cannot prevent granting registration under section 12AB, directing the renewal for a trust already registered under 12AA.
The assessee alleged denial of opportunity and improper handling of evidence. The Tribunal agreed that the appellate order was passed without due consideration of records and remand findings. The matter was sent back for fresh adjudication in accordance with law.
ITAT remanded penalty proceedings to CIT(A) as the underlying quantum of income addition is pending adjudication, directing fresh consideration post-quantum decision.
Tribunal condoned a 111-day delay citing sufficient cause and held that rejection of 12AB registration without effective hearing required reconsideration. Matter remanded for a fresh decision.
The Tribunal overturned the dismissal of the appeal for lateness and allowed a full reconsideration of the issues. It emphasized that the delay must not be raised again during adjudication.
