ITAT Chennai restored a lakh addition made u/s 115BBC to a trust, granting one chance to furnish complete donor details (name, address, PAN, and mode of receipt).
The ITAT ruled that only the Gross Profit (GP) percentage on unaccounted purchases, not the entire purchase value, is taxable as undisclosed income. The Tribunal rejected the inflated purchase rate of Rs. 1,500 based solely on a partner’s statement, instead fixing a fair estimated rate of Rs. 770 per unit.
The ITAT Chennai Bench dismissed an appeal because the Assessing Officer (AO) was located in Hyderabad, violating Rule 4 which dictates ITAT jurisdiction is based on the AO’s office. The ruling affirmed the principle from the Supreme Court that appeals must be filed before the correct jurisdictional ITAT Bench, though it granted the taxpayer liberty to refile properly.
ITAT Chennai held that revisional powers under Section 263 cannot be used to substitute the Assessing Officer’s view when proper enquiry was conducted. The AO’s acceptance of business loss and PF/ESI deductions was valid.
ITAT Chennai rules that the Section 54 capital gains deduction cannot be denied solely because sale proceeds weren’t deposited in CGAS before the return deadline, provided the amount is used within three years.
Provision for customer loyalty points, computed on a scientific and consistent basis, constituted a present and ascertained liability deductible under Section 37(1). Disallowance u/s 14A was deleted since no exempt income was earned during the year.
The ITAT confirmed that Section 54F capital gains exemption covers the entire investment in a new residential house, including the cost of land, even if purchased early. It ruled that land is an inseparable component, upholding the construction timeline as sufficient compliance.
The ITAT upheld the disallowance of delayed employee contributions to PF/ESIC, ruling that the Supreme Courts Checkmate Services judgment is retrospective unless explicitly stated otherwise by the SC itself. The Tribunal confirmed that the doctrine of prospective overruling cannot be invoked by the assessee, as the ruling merely interprets the law as it always existed.
The ITAT ruled that interest on enhanced compensation for the compulsory acquisition of agricultural land is fully exempt from income tax, citing Section 96 of the RFCTLARR Act, 2013. The Tribunal held that this special law overrides the general tax provisions (Sections 56 and 145A), deleting the entire Rs.97.44 lakh addition.
The ruling establishes that the AO cannot selectively accept total sales and profit figures while disbelieving a corresponding cash deposit from those sales without rejecting the books or providing concrete proof of bogus entries. Treating the recorded cash deposits as unexplained income is illegal double taxation.
