The ITAT held that approval merely stating “Yes, I am satisfied” shows no application of mind. Such sanction fails the statutory requirement and invalidates reopening.
The ITAT held that loans and advances accepted in earlier scrutiny assessments cannot be doubted later without fresh incriminating material. Mere balance-sheet analysis or suspicion is insufficient.
The ITAT held that unrecorded sales cannot be taxed in full under Section 69A. Only the profit element at a reasonable GP rate is assessable as business income.
The ITAT held that reassessment based purely on an Investigation Wing report, without the Assessing Officer forming an independent belief, is invalid. Copy-pasted reasons failed to establish a live link between material and escapement of income.
The ITAT held that a notice under Section 143(2) issued by a non-jurisdictional officer is invalid. Such a defect strikes at the root of the assessment and cannot be cured.
The Tribunal held that an assessment framed without a valid notice under Section 143(2) by the jurisdictional officer is void. Jurisdictional compliance is mandatory.
The Tribunal held that Section 69A applies only to money not recorded in books of account. Additions based on duly recorded, bank-routed transactions were found unsustainable.
The Tribunal deleted an addition under Section 69A after holding that cash deposits were explained through prior bank withdrawals. The ruling affirms that redeposit of own withdrawn cash cannot be treated as unexplained.
The Tribunal held that past cash withdrawals cannot justify demonetisation deposits without evidence of continued cash holding. The is that unexplained deposits attract section 69A.
The issue was whether a charitable trust could lose exemption due to late uploading of Form 10B. ITAT held that Form 10B is procedural and delay alone cannot defeat exemption when audit was completed in time.
