The Tribunal held that once the assessee proves identity, genuineness, and source through documents and bank records, the burden shifts to the Revenue. Without rebuttal of evidence, addition under Section 68 cannot survive.
ITAT ruled that the AO’s omission to apply TDS provisions on freight charges warrants revision. Proper application of statutory disallowances is mandatory in reassessment proceedings.
The issue was whether a penalty can survive when the notice does not specify the exact charge. The Tribunal held that a vague notice vitiates the entire penalty proceedings, even where AMT liability exists.
The Tribunal found that key evidences furnished by the assessee were not adequately considered by lower authorities. The issue was restored to ensure fair examination and compliance with natural justice.
The issue was whether personal capital could be compared with partnership capital to infer unexplained credits. The Tribunal held the comparison flawed and upheld deletion of the Section 68 addition.
The court set aside reassessment proceedings after finding doubt over valid service of notices. Failure to ensure proper communication denied the assessee a fair hearing.
The High Court quashed an ex-parte appellate order after finding that penalty was enhanced without giving the taxpayer an opportunity of hearing. The ruling holds that such enhancement violates Section 107(11) and principles of natural justice.
The Supreme Court rejected the Revenue’s delayed appeal where reassessment was initiated repeatedly for the same year. The ruling confirms that completed reassessment on merits cannot be reopened again.
The Court held that reassessment cannot be initiated once an assessment is conclusively closed. Supreme Court directions on reassessment notices were found inapplicable to finalized cases.
The Tribunal ruled that penalty under Section 270A cannot stand where income is enhanced purely by estimation. Additions made by applying a higher profit rate, without incriminating material, fall outside under-reporting.