The ITAT Nagpur condoned a 489-day delay and, on merits, deleted an addition of ₹20,32,500 made under Section 69, holding that the Assessing Officer failed to provide substantive evidence or corroboration that the investment was made in the relevant assessment year, A.Y.
The ITAT Nagpur has set aside a penalty of ₹11.8 lakh imposed on Kirtikumar Haribhai Patel, ruling that the penalty, being consequential to the assessment order, cannot survive once the original assessment is restored for fresh adjudication.
ITAT Nagpur has dismissed Revenue’s appeal against Western Coalfields Ltd., affirming that a delay in filing Form 10-IC for the concessional tax rate under Section 115BAA can be condoned.
The ITAT Nagpur has set aside a revision order by the PCIT against Nirmalkumar Agrawal (HUF). The tribunal ruled that the PCIT could not invoke Section 263 to revise an assessment where the AO had already conducted a thorough enquiry and formed a plausible view, even if a different view was possible.
ITAT Nagpur has set aside the dismissal of Balkishan Mohanlal Gandhi’s appeal. The Tribunal ruled that the CIT(A)’s two notices with very short deadlines did not constitute a fair opportunity, and the order was invalid as it failed to be a speaking order.
ITAT Nagpur remands Alankar Real Estates’ case to CIT(A) for a fresh hearing. The Tribunal found the CIT(A)’s dismissal and simultaneous adjudication on merits contradictory, denying the assessee a fair chance.
The ITAT Nagpur has ruled that income surrendered during a survey from an excess stock of jewelry is business income, not an unexplained investment.
ITAT Nagpur remands Mohd. Siraj’s appeal to CIT(A), allowing him a fresh chance to prove large bank deposits belonged to his employer, not him.
PCIT’s revision order on Gajanand Financial Consultancy’s protective addition was quashed by ITAT Nagpur. The Tribunal ruled the AO made a detailed enquiry, and protective additions can’t be revised when substantive ones exist.
The Income Tax Appellate Tribunal (ITAT) Nagpur condoned a 729-day delay in Rupa Abhay Vyas’s appeal, citing the death of her legal counsel during the COVID-19 pandemic and her subsequent medical diagnosis.
