ITAT Surat held that rejection of the application for condonation of delay in filing refund claim u/s 119(2)(b) of the Act is not an appealable order u/s. 253. Thus, appeal dismissed as infructuous.
ITAT Surat held that addition under section 68 of the Income Tax Act deleted since appellant has satisfactorily explained the nature and source of the credit. Accordingly, appeal allowed and addition deleted.
Search action was carried out on residential premises of assessee. Several incriminating documents were found and seized. Assessee was issued with notice to file Income Tax Return and seeking details for seven assessment years within 5 days.
In the matter abovementioned ITAT deleted addition made on account of undisclosed cash deposits during demonetization period after observing that assessee has substantiate means of income for depositing cash.
Aggrieved by this order, assessee filed an appeal before Tribunal. It was held that CIT(E) had not examined the objects and activities of assessee trust which were the twin conditions for granting registration under Section 12A/12AB
The date on which AO passed the above order was 28.11.2019; therefore, re-opening of case for AY.2011-12 is time barred as per the clear provisions of section 150(2) of the Act. Hence, the direction of the CIT(A) is not in accordance with law and is liable to be quashed.
ITAT Surat held that in absence of any corroborative evidence with regard to payment of amount mentioned in sauda chitti, assessee is not entitled to claim enhanced cost of acquisition and hence appeal of the assessee dismissed.
ITAT considered two issues on this aspect. Firstly, whether PCIT rightly exercised its revisional jurisdiction and secondly whether order u/s 263 was passed on merits regarding to the net foreign exchange gain.
ITAT Surat held that purchase of credit cards by making cash payments without providing explanation with regard to nature and source of money is liable to be added under section 69A of the Income Tax Act.
Entire cash deposits made during demonetization could not be treated as unexplained credit and a reasonable addition of 20% of total cash deposit would be sufficient to avoid the possibility of revenue leakage.
