As per provisions of section 153C of the Act, notice required to be issued to the other person would be a notice under section 153C of the Act, but even then assessment is to be framed in accordance with the procedure prescribed under section 153A of the Act.
ITAT Jaipur rules in favor of Deepak Kumar Samtani, dismissing penalty under Section 272A(1)(C) due to lack of evidence of non-compliance with issued notices.
ITAT Jaipur upheld CIT(A)’s decision to delete bogus purchase additions, validating a 13.05% profit rate declared by the assessee in the case.
ITAT Jaipur held that provisions of 68 as such are not applicable on the sale transactions recorded in the books of accounts because the sale transaction are already part of the income which is already credited in statement of profit & loss account.
ITAT Jaipur reviews Vimla Devi Agrotech Ltd.’s penalty appeal for non-maintenance of accounts under section 271B of the IT Act, highlighting procedural errors.
ITAT Jaipur allowed Naval Kishore’s appeal, ruling that no additions could be made under Section 153A, as no incriminating material was found during the search.
ITAT Jaipur addresses tax rate dispute in Sadhwani Wood Products Pvt Ltd case, involving unaccounted cash sales and Section 115BBE of Income Tax Act.
Analysis of Saket Agarwal Vs ITO case (ITAT Jaipur), focusing on the Rs. 3.17 Cr addition of unproved creditors and assessment under Section 41(1).
ITAT Jaipur held that mere entering into the Development Agreement would not permit invocation of section 45(2) of the Income Tax Act. There is no positive act which indicates that the assessee has treated capital asset as stock-in-trade.
Tribunal upheld 20% addition instead of 25% on alleged bogus purchases due to unverified sellers agreeing that assessee failed to prove the genuineness of the transactions, and confirmed penalty proceedings.
