The ITAT Chandigarh confirmed the denial of Section 12A and 80G tax exemptions for the TIF Foundation, ruling that its primary activities of distributing awards and funding a chess association were inconsistent with its declared charitable objects of helping the needy.
Chandigarh ITAT held that CIT(A) has no power to set aside assessments passed u/s 143(3), as such power exists only for ex-parte orders u/s 144. Revenue’s appeal was allowed, and the case remanded for fresh adjudication on merits.
Summary of Deepika Garg vs. ITO (ITAT Chandigarh) for AY 2017-18. The ruling deletes a Rs. 24 lakh addition for alleged bogus cash sales, upholding the assessee’s audited books and documented transactions.
ITAT Chandigarh restored an AO’s assessment order, quashing a PCIT’s revisionary order that doubted agricultural income despite adequate inquiry and documentary evidence.
ITAT Chandigarh deletes a Rs.59.50 lakh addition, ruling that a school with receipts under Rs.1 crore is fully exempt under Section 10(23C)(iiiad), making Section 11(5) restrictions inapplicable.
ITAT Chandigarh rules for Aarti Singal, deleting additions u/s 68 & 69C. LTCG from listed shares held genuine & not bogus accommodation entries, as Revenue failed to provide specific proof.
Tribunal deletes all additions against Lakhvir Kaur, finding no incriminating material. The ruling concerned foreign travel, vehicle expenses, and jewellery for A.Y. 2020-21, along with a poultry farm on-money addition for A.Y. 2021-22.
The ITAT Chandigarh ruled in favor of an assessee, deleting an addition of ₹8.70 lakh. The tribunal found loans from close relatives and sons were genuine, with donors having sufficient income.
The ITAT Chandigarh has quashed an assessment based on a WhatsApp chat, citing lack of mandatory approval and insufficient evidence. The tribunal upheld the deletion of a Rs. 1.12 crore addition for unexplained investment, emphasizing that digital communication alone requires corroboration.
ITAT Chandigarh deletes an addition, ruling that an unsigned and unregistered agreement to sell is not valid evidence for making an addition under Section 69 or 69B.
