The ITAT deleted the addition for cash deposits made during demonetization, concluding that taxing the same business receipts twice by first accepting sales and then applying Section 69A was unsustainable under the law.
ITAT Cuttack remanded a demonetization case back to CIT(A), granting legal heir of deceased assessee a fresh opportunity. Tribunal ruled that appeal, which involved factual verification of large cash deposits, should be adjudicated on merits after allowing heir to furnish supporting documents.
Relying on the Schneider Electric judgment of the Delhi High Court, the ITAT held that absence of a separate immunity order within one month does not justify penalty imposition.
The ITAT Kolkata allowed a trusts appeal, ruling its anonymous donations were not taxable under Section 115BBC after the trust demonstrated its objects included both religious and charitable purposes via an amended deed. The ruling overturned lower authority additions that had incorrectly classified the trust as purely charitable.
The ITAT Kolkata restored Section 12A registration and Section 11 exemption to the Chamber of Commerce, holding that its objects and activities are charitable in nature, similar to the Indian Chamber of Commerce. The Tribunal applied the rule of consistency, noting the Chamber’s registration was already granted for subsequent assessment years.
The ITAT Kolkata ruled that no disallowance under Section 14A read with Rule 8D can be made if the taxpayer did not earn any exempt income during the relevant financial year. The Tribunal fully allowed the appeal, reiterating the established legal position against mechanical disallowance when there is no dividend or tax-free income.
ITAT Kolkata held that reassessment proceedings were invalid as the notice under Section 148 failed to disclose mandatory approval under Section 151. The Tribunal found the reopening to be mechanical and without independent application of mind, rendering the reassessment void ab initio.
The ITAT Kolkata deleted the Rs.10.25 crore addition made under Section 68, ruling that an addition cannot be sustained solely on a survey statement that was subsequently retracted, citing coercion. The court found the loans were genuine, routed through banking channels, supported by evidence, and later repaid with TDS deducted interest.
ITAT Kolkata quashed the reopening assessment for AY 2015-16, ruling the Section 148 notice issued on 31.07.2022 was time-barred. This decision strictly follows the Rajeev Bansal (SC) judgment, which held that the TOLA extension for reopening notices did not apply to AY 2015-16 beyond 31.03.2021.
The ITAT Kolkata deleted the Section 68 addition of Rs.1.67 crore, holding that loans proven to be repaid through banking channels with TDS deducted on interest cannot be treated as bogus accommodation entries.1 The ruling emphasizes that additions based solely on a retracted survey statement lack evidentiary value, especially without corroborating material.
