ITAT slams AO & CIT(A) for Unwarranted litigation, incompetence & casual approach 

Nikunj Kaushik Shah Vs ITO (ITAT Mumbai)

Introduction: The case of Nikunj Kaushik Shah vs Income Tax Officer (ITO) before the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal (ITAT) Mumbai has garnered attention due to its scrutiny of additions made on the sale of shares. The ITAT’s decision highlights the lack of substantiated evidence and the consequences of unwarranted litigation.

Detailed Analysis: The appeal contested the addition of Rs. 4,60,497 under Section 68 of the Income Tax Act, alleging money laundering through share transactions. The ITAT noted the absence of corroborative evidence and the genuine intra-day trading nature of the transactions, questioning the basis for the addition.

Moreover, the addition of Rs. 13,815 under Section 69C was also disputed, emphasizing the lack of evidence supporting the assumption of commission payment without basis.

The reopening of assessment under Section 147 faced criticism for its timing and lack of reasonable belief in income escapement, challenging the validity of the proceedings.

Please become a Premium member. If you are already a Premium member, login here to access the full content.