ITAT Lucknow dismissed Revenue’s appeal challenging CIT(A)’s exemption order under Section 26AAB as the AO had already accepted the claim.
ITAT Lucknow rules no additions allowed under sections 153A or 153C without incriminating evidence during search in Smt. Shashi Agarwal’s case.
Read about Pahari Mata Sahkari Awas Samiti Ltd. Vs ACIT (ITAT Lucknow). The Commissioner (Appeals) cannot dismiss the appeal for non-prosecution and must decide on merits.
Analysis of the ITAT Lucknow case Mahendra Lalka Vs DCIT on Sec 69 of the Income Tax Act. Key findings, implications, and legal insights included.
ITAT Lucknow held that amount of disallowance of expenditure, on presumption of leakage in the form of expenditure of personal nature, reduced as found that total amount of disallowance by lower authority was excessive and unreasonably high.
ITAT Lucknow sets aside additions made for cash deposits during demonetization in Shiva Goods Carrier Pvt Ltd vs DCIT, orders de novo proceedings under section 68 of the Income Tax Act.
ITAT Lucknow held that benefit of exemption cannot be disallowed merely because the same was claimed u/s 54F of the Income Tax Act instead of claiming u/s 54 of the Income Tax Act. Such mistake is inadvertent and typographical mistake.
Once no TDS is liable to be deducted on these purchases, no disallowance under section 40 (a)(ia) of the I.T. Act can be attracted. Hence, we delete this addition.
Addition of unexplained cash based on third-party statements was not sustainable as assessee had filed all documentary evidences which had not been adversely commented by the authorities below, coupled with the fact that the authorities below had made and sustained the additions on the basis of statements of third parties which had not been made available to assessees for cross examination.
ITAT Lucknow held that statement recorded u/s 133A of the Income Tax Act is not an incriminating material for the purpose of making search assessment u/s 153A.
