Tribunal held that Section 69A covers unexplained money, not loans recorded in books. As all 14 lenders confirmed transactions with evidence, ₹1.86 crore addition was deleted.
ITAT Kolkata quashed the reopening for AY 2015-16, following the Supreme Court’s Rajeev Bansal ruling. The Tribunal held that the benefit of the extended limitation under TOLA was unavailable after 01.04.2021 for this assessment year.
ITAT Kolkata invalidated the assessment under Section 143(3), ruling that the foundational notice under Section 143(2) was void ab initio for failing to comply with the mandatory CBDT prescribed format. CBDT instructions issued under Section 119 are binding on the department.
ITAT Kolkata ruled that a charitable trust’s exemption under Section 11/10(23C) cannot be denied for technical lapse of belatedly filing Form 10B/10BB. Audit report was available when return was processed.
ITAT Kolkata ruled that payments for composing and DTP work are contractual, not technical services, and thus taxable under Section 194C, not Section 194J of Income Tax Act.
ITAT Kolkata deleted a Rs.7.11 crore addition under Section 68, ruling that an assessee’s comprehensive documentary evidence (PAN, bank statements) cannot be dismissed merely because subscribers failed to appear for summons. The onus shifted back to the Revenue.
The Kolkata ITAT deleted a Rs.31 crore unexplained cash credit addition under Section 68 on the sale of shares, ruling the AO mechanically relied on an investigation report without fresh evidence. The tribunal held that investments accepted by the Department in previous years and confirmed via an NCLT merger cannot be summarily taxed upon sale.
The Kolkata ITAT quashed the Section 263 revision, confirming that the Assessing Officer (AO) had specifically examined and accepted the ICDS adjustments during scrutiny. The tribunal held that when the AO conducts due inquiry and takes a plausible view, the assessment is neither erroneous nor prejudicial to the Revenue’s interest.
ITAT quashed a reassessment, ruling that S 148 notice was invalid because it was issued before AO formally received mandatory sanction from PCIT under S 151. Relying on Supreme Court, Tribunal held that internal approval is insufficient; communication of sanction to AO is a jurisdictional prerequisite.
The ITAT Kolkata dismissed an appeal filed by Santhosh Devi Soni as withdrawn after the assessee elected to settle the tax dispute under the Direct Tax Vivad Se Viswas (DTVSV) Scheme, 2024. The Tribunal accepted the withdrawal request since the dispute was resolved under the settlement scheme.
