The appellate order was passed ex-parte under the faceless system. The Tribunal restored the appeal, directing the authority to grant three effective opportunities to the taxpayer.
Cash deposits during demonetisation were treated as unexplained under section 69A. The Tribunal accepted possible redeposit of earlier withdrawals and restricted the addition to ₹2 lakh.
The Revenue taxed entire demonetisation cash deposits as unexplained under section 69A with section 115BBE. The Tribunal held that cash sales are possible in retail trade and restricted the addition to a 10% GP estimate.
The ITAT Delhi held that rental income already assessed in the hands of an HUF cannot be taxed again in the individual’s assessment. The addition was deleted to prevent double taxation of the same income.
The ITAT Delhi ruled that money received from a husband qualifies as an exempt gift from a relative under section 56. Such receipts cannot be treated as unexplained income in reassessment proceedings.
The dispute arose from survey-based additions relying mainly on a statement and impounded agreement. The Tribunal held that the matter needed fresh examination and remanded it to the AO with one final opportunity.
ITAT Pune admitted affidavits and satellite images showing land under cultivation, restoring the issue to AO for reassessment. Proper evidence can overturn non-agri classification for capital gains.
ITAT Pune struck down a ₹34.28 lakh penalty issued after the company had merged, citing substantive illegality. Penalty orders must be issued in the name of a legally existing entity.
The assessee failed to file returns for two years preceding the capital increase. The Tribunal held that unexplained capital accretion must be taxed under section 68.
ITAT Surat struck down a 50% turnover-based income estimation, applying Section 44AD to compute actual presumptive profit at 8%. Key takeaway: AO cannot inflate income without legal basis.
