The Tribunal ruled in favour of the assessee after noting that audited financials, PAN, bank statements, ITRs, confirmations, and MCA records of lenders were furnished. The ruling reinforces that documentary evidence can successfully rebut allegations of bogus loans.
The Kolkata ITAT held that the Assessing Officer cannot make arbitrary 10% expense disallowances without identifying specific defects or inflated claims. The Tribunal upheld deletion of ₹2.23 crore addition after finding the disallowance was based purely on guesswork and suspicion.
ITAT Rajkot held that revision under section 263 was not sustainable where the Assessing Officer had already conducted extensive verification of agricultural income and expenses. The Tribunal observed that detailed notices, documentary evidence, and independent inquiries were part of the original assessment proceedings.
Kolkata ITAT observed that suppressed turnover results in savings of rent, salary, and fixed expenses, warranting higher profit estimation, though not at the rate applied by the Assessing Officer.
Kolkata ITAT upheld deletion of addition relating to alleged bogus penny stock loss after finding that the assessee had furnished contract notes, demat records, broker statements, and bank documents supporting the transactions.
The ITAT Kolkata held that delayed filing of Form No. 67 is only a procedural defect and cannot deprive an assessee of Foreign Tax Credit under Section 90 and the India-USA DTAA.
The ITAT Kolkata held that delayed filing of Form No. 67 cannot deprive an assessee of Foreign Tax Credit under Section 90 and the India-UK DTAA. The Tribunal treated the delay as a procedural defect.
ITAT Kolkata set aside the penalty order under Section 271D after the assessee claimed inadequate opportunity of hearing during penalty proceedings. The matter was remanded for fresh adjudication and examination of supporting evidence.
ITAT Kolkata set aside the appellate order after observing inconsistencies between the findings of the CIT(A) and the assessment order. The Tribunal directed fresh adjudication with a reasoned speaking order and proper opportunity of hearing.
ITAT Kolkata held that entire bogus purchases must be added under Section 69C where the supplier was proved to be a paper entity and no evidence of actual delivery of goods existed. The ruling reiterates that bank payments and invoices alone cannot establish genuineness.
