ITAT Chennai held that when the cash is sourced out of recorded sales, the provisions of section 69A of the Income Tax Act could not be invoked since sales have already been offered to tax and taxing same again u/s. 69A would amount to double taxation.
ITAT Chennai held that material/ information referred by AO in reasons recorded cannot be held to be tangible material hence reopening of assessment under section 147 of the Income Tax Act without tangible material is invalid.
ITAT Chennai held that although the assessee company was following the mercantile system of accounting, only real income could be brought to tax. Hypothetical income cannot be taxed. Hence, appeal of revenue dismissed.
In the matter abovementioned ITAT allowed the appeal of the assessee after deleting the addition made u/s 68 after observing the fact that assessee had filed relevent details during assesssment.
ITAT Chennai held that addition under section 69 towards unaccounted gold and silver jewellery set aside relying on CBDT instruction no. 1916 dated 11.05.1994. Accordingly, appeal of the assessee allowed.
ITAT Chennai ruled that brokers facilitating land deals are not liable under Section 269SS as they act on behalf of clients and do not receive payments in their own right.
ITAT Chennai dismisses FLsmidth’s appeal, upholding PCIT’s order for reassessment due to lack of verification by AO.
ITAT Chennai sends ₹42.72 lakh cash deposit case back to AO for fresh assessment after assessee fails to justify deposits made during demonetization.
ITAT Chennai deletes ₹5 crore addition u/s 68, holding assessee proved source of funds. Lease deposit deemed genuine, creditworthiness established.
ITAT Chennai held that revisionary proceedings under section 263 of the Income Tax Act for invoking penalty provisions u/s. 270A(9)(e) without issue of intimation under section 143(1)(a) of the Income Tax Act is unjustifiable and untenable in law.
