ITAT Raipur held that addition under section 2(22)(e) of the Income Tax Act towards deemed dividend is vacated since loan is advanced in the preceding year. Therefore, in absence of any payment by the company in the current year, there is no justification to held that amount is received as deemed dividend.
ITAT Raipur held that addition u/s. 68 of the Income Tax Act made without invalidating evidences establishing identity/ creditworthiness of investor and genuineness of transaction not justifiable. Accordingly, appeal of revenue dismissed.
ITAT Raipur held that matter regarding unexplained money addition under section 68 of the Income Tax Act restored back as basic ingredients required u/s 68, i.e., identity / creditworthiness of the investors and genuineness of transactions not satisfactorily explained.
The ITAT ruled that the PCIT wrongly invoked Section 263 by relying on unverified external information (e.g., SEBI data and license suspension claims) to label purchases as bogus, without providing this information to the assessee for rebuttal. The tribunal deleted the revisionary order, confirming that the PCIT acted illegally by presuming facts and ignoring the documentary proof of purchase genuineness.
ITAT Raipur set aside the levy of fees under Section 234E for delayed TDS statements filed before the 01.06.2015 amendment to Section 200A. Following the Karnataka High Court ruling, the Tribunal held that in the absence of an enabling provision for computation, the levy of a late fee for the period before that date is unenforceable.
The Tribunal held that the AO and CIT(A) erred by rejecting the explanation (withdrawal via bearer cheque) simply because the assessee had not used that method before. The ruling emphasized that the Department cannot reject a proven source unless it brings contrary evidence of an alternate undisclosed source.
ITAT Upholds Taxpayer Rights, Limits Section 148 Reassessments on Net Income: ITAT confirmed that income tax reassessments must be based on net taxable income, not gross sale proceeds. Notices issued beyond the three-year window without exceeding ₹50 lakh threshold are invalid.
The ITAT Raipur condoned a 93-day delay citing the medical student’s hectic schedule and remanded the Rs. 11,82,000/− unexplained cash deposit addition under Section 69A to the CIT(A) for a de novo hearing.
ITAT Raipur ruled that the NFAC cannot dismiss a tax appeal solely for delay without examining its merits, citing CIT Vs. Premkumar Arjundas Luthra. Case remanded.
ITAT Raipur dismisses an appeal against an Income Tax penalty order as withdrawn, as the assessee opted for settlement under the Vivad Se Vishwas Scheme 2024, with a caveat for restoration if the settlement fails.
