The ITAT condoned a two-day delay caused by OTP and system issues, noting the Revenue’s failure to rebut the explanation. The ruling affirms a pragmatic approach to minor procedural lapses.
Rakesh Kumar Pandey Vs ACIT (ITAT Lucknow) 7% Is Reasonable, 11% Is Wishful: ITAT Reins in Profit Estimation in Contractor’s Case- When Books Are Estimated, Disallowances Die: ITAT’s Clean Sweep in Search Assessment- Search Confession Can’t Rewrite Past: ITAT Caps NP at 7% & Deletes Pre-Search Additions Issue 1: Estimation of Net Profit after Search […]
Tribunal held that ownership records alone cannot justify agricultural income; absence of Khasra and produce-sale evidence required remand. Cultivation must be proved with proper documentation.
ITAT remanded assessment where substantial 69A addition was made without giving the assessee a chance to present his case. Procedural fairness is critical, even in non-filing scenarios.
ITAT Lucknow restored the reassessment u/s 147 after holding that CIT(A) misread the AO’s findings and wrongly assumed verification of books and cash deposits. The Tribunal found the appellate order perverse and allowed the Revenue’s appeal.
ITAT Lucknow held that part of commission income from sugar mills cannot be taxed since other part of commission income has already been allowed for deduction under section 80P of the Income Tax Act. Accordingly, addition of part of commission income set aside and appeal allowed.
The ITAT held that specific-purpose government grants for institutional development are corpus by their inherent character. The AO’s addition of ₹1.7 crore to gross receipts was quashed, emphasizing that utilized grants for setting up assets cannot be treated as income.
The ITAT ruled that the assessee’s exemption claim must be reassessed following a retrospective CBDT notification increasing the non-government leave encashment limit to ₹25 lakh. Earlier appellate decisions restricting exemption were set aside. Takeaway: retrospective amendments can reopen exemption eligibility in pending cases.
The ITAT Lucknow held that the penalty imposed under Section 271C on NHAI was invalid as it was passed beyond the six-month limitation period and became unsustainable after deletion of the related addition.
The ITAT Lucknow quashed the ex-parte appellate orders for AY 2013-14, 2015-16, and 2016-17, ruling that the CIT(A) failed in its statutory duty to pass a speaking order on the appeal merits. The case is remitted for a de novo assessment.
