ITAT Varanasi held that principles of natural justice demand that both the parties, i.e. assessee as well as AO, shall be given opportunity of being heard, before being condemned and any prejudice is caused. Impugned order not satisfying the same is liable to be set aside.
Dive into Anuradha Pandey’s case vs. ITO (ITAT Varanasi). ITAT’s scrutiny on investment source from closing stock and debtors. Analysis of the disputed addition and its resolution
Held that rectification application u/s 154, after ROI being processed u/s 143(1)(a), for any typographical/ technical mistake reflected higher income than real income should be accepted by AO to verify the correctness of the total income of assessee
Assessee cannot be permitted to adopt a modus operandi and giving an accounting treatment to GST without passing through profit and loss account to circumvent provisions of section 43B
Held that estimating past savings as Rs. 6,00,000, without any basis, instead of Rs. 9,03,900 and also ignoring the evidences produced for the same. Addition of the same deleted.
ITAT held that carrying on the statutory functions or activities which is mandate of the law cannot be said to be trade, commerce or business.
Explore the U Toll Corporation Ltd vs ACIT case (ITAT Varanasi) on unsecured loans. Analysis of loan discrepancies, cash deposits, and the ITAT decision.
