ITAT Surat held that rejection of application for regular approval of fund under section 80G(5) of the Income Tax Act as time barred not justified in terms of relaxation of time period as per CBDT Circular no. 7/2024 dated 25.04.2024
Therefore, the addition made by the AO u/s 68 is sustained. Since, addition u/s 68 has been upheld, the expenditure incurred to earn the above sums are to be added u/s 69C as unexplained expenditure.
ITAT Surat remands Mahesh Desai’s appeal to AO, allowing him to substantiate cash deposits after prior ex parte decisions, upholding fair hearing principles.
ITAT Surat lowers commission income rate for Nanak Motumal Pherwani to 0.50% on bank transactions, aligning with reasonable industry standards in cheque discounting.
ITAT Surat held that addition under section 68 of the Income Tax Act is not sustainable since AO has not made any independent investigation of fact. Accordingly, ad hoc disallowance @10% upheld to avoid the possibility of revenue leakage.
CIT(A) confirmed the addition to the extent of Rs.1.42 crores and remaining addition of Rs.3.35 crores, which was closing balance of loans were deleted. Further aggrieved, the revenue has filed present appeal before the Tribunal.
ITAT restored appeal of Trupti Ashishkumar Desai against an addition under Section 69A, emphasizing need for fair opportunity and compliance.
ITAT Surat held that considering the veracity of evidence, additional evidence filed by the assessee is essential and has direct bearing on all the additions/ disallowance, hence, all the additional evidence are taken on record. Accordingly, matter restored back.
The case of the assessee was selected for scrutiny for the reasons of cash deposit during the demonetization. During assessment, AO noted that assessee have made cash deposit of Rs.10,50,000/- in his bank account.
ITAT Surat held that addition on account of cash deposit during demonetization confirmed by both AO and CIT(A) by passing ex-parte order. However, majority of cash deposits are prior to demonetization period. Hence, matter remanded back for fresh verification.
