Jaipur ITAT Directs Dept. To Allow Taxpayer To File Revised Appeal Memo In Form No. 35 For Removal Of Deficiency Case Title: Zila Parisad verses Addl. CIT, TDS While relegating the taxpayer to file a revised appeal memo in Form No. 35 either on the e-filing portal of the department or physical form, the Jaipur ITAT restored the matter back to the file of the CIT(A) to adjudicate...
Jaipur ITAT Directs Dept. To Allow Taxpayer To File Revised Appeal Memo In Form No. 35 For Removal Of Deficiency
Case Title: Zila Parisad verses Addl. CIT, TDS
While relegating the taxpayer to file a revised appeal memo in Form No. 35 either on the e-filing portal of the department or physical form, the Jaipur ITAT restored the matter back to the file of the CIT(A) to adjudicate the matter of rectification application for removal of deficiency, afresh, as per law.
Incorrect Assumption Of Facts Alone Is No Basis To Revoke Revisionary Jurisdiction U/s 263: Rajkot ITAT
Case Title: Kishorkumar Bhalara verses The Principal Commissioner of Income Tax
On finding that the PCIT has held the assessment order passed by AO as erroneous and prejudicial to the interest of the Revenue simply based on incorrect assumption of facts, the Rajkot ITAT directed to set aside the order passed u/s 263 of the Income tax Act, 1963.
Cash Deposits Made During Demonetization Is No Basis For Addition U/s 68, Without Rejecting Audited Books Of Account: Delhi ITAT
Case Title: Shivam Industries verses ACIT
On finding that the authorities have not considered the history of the assessee and not even rejected its books of accounts, the New Delhi ITAT deleted the addition sustained by the CIT(A) u/s 68 of the Income Tax Act.
Taxpayer Must Substantiate Form 26AS Or Form 16 So As To Claim Credit Over TDS: Mumbai ITAT
Case Title: Shri Ajit Chandrashekar Dighe verses DCIT
While remanding the case back for re-adjudication, the Mumbai ITAT held that the prima facie onus would be upon the Assessee to substantiate its claim of non-granting of TDS credit, by providing relevant documents, such as an appointment letter, salary slips or Form No.16 or bank statements, or any other corroborative evidence/ documents.
Additions U/s 69 Should Not Be Based Merely On Obtaining Surrender Statements: Chandigarh ITAT
Case Title: Shri Jaspreet Singh Mauj verses DCIT/ACIT
On finding that the assessee in clear terms has surrendered the additional professional income covering the expenditure incurred on the building, the Chandigarh ITAT held that the invocation of Section 115BBE of the Income Tax Act, is not applicable and hence deleted the addition made by the AO on account of the addition in the value of building u/s 69.
Litigant Is Not Allowed To Use Process Of Law To Achieve Ulterior Purpose In Under Hand Way By Filing Appeal Belatedly: Indore ITAT
Case Title: Shri Abhishek Singh verses Pr. CIT
On finding that the assessee has failed to make out a case of reasonable cause much less sufficient cause for an abnormal delay of more than six years in filing the appeal, the Indore ITAT declined to condone the inordinate delay in filing of appeal and consequently dismissed the appeal filed against the revision order passed u/s 263 of Income Tax Act, being barred by limitation.
Receipts By Taxpayer Can't Be Added To Its Income U/s 68 For Just Non-Compliance Of Summons Issued U/s 131: Kolkata ITAT
Case Title: Nano Infra Promoters Pvt. Ltd verses ITO
On finding that the addition is based upon conjecture and surmises and not on records which were available before the authorities, the Kolkata ITAT set aside the order passed by the CIT(A) and directed the AO to delete the addition made u/s 68 of the Income Tax Act.
No Addition U/S 69 Is Permitted Without Examining & Finding Fault In Cash Book Produced By Taxpayer: Delhi ITAT
Case Title: Shri Mool Chand Aggarwal verses Asst. CIT
On finding that the CIT(A) has failed to examine the cash book presented by the assessee, the New Delhi ITAT deleted the addition sustained by CIT(A) u/s 69 of the Income Tax Act.
Bifurcated Details Of Income From Specified & Non-Specified Business Is Not Available: Indore ITAT Asks To Reconsider Deduction U/s 35AD
Case Title: ACIT verses MP Warehousing and Logistics Corporation
While setting aside the order of deduction passed u/s 35AD of the Income Tax Act in relation to investment on warehouse, the Indore ITAT has remitted back the issue to the AO for proper verification and consideration of the bifurcated details of income from specified and non-specified business after finding that such bifurcation of income was not presented earlier before the AO.
Simple Disagreement With Plausible Views Of AO Is No Basis For CIT To Assume Jurisdiction U/s 263: Kolkata ITAT
Case Title: Satbir Mahato verses PCIT
While quashing the invalid exercise of jurisdiction by PCIT u/s 263 of the Income Tax Act, without satisfying the conditions precedent for such section, the Kolkata ITAT held that the PCIT cannot invoke the jurisdiction u/s 263 to substitute his view in place of AO on the ground that he does not agree with the view taken by the AO.
Ex-Parte Order Which Resulted Into Denial Of Proper Opportunity Of Being Heard, Merits Remand: Mumbai ITAT
Case Title: Mohd Shahid Mohd Yusuf Qureshi verses Dy. Commissioner of Income-tax
On finding that the order passed by the Commissioner is an ex-parte order which resulted into denial of proper opportunity of being heard, the Mumbai ITAT set aside the order passed u/s 144 of the Income Tax Act, and remanded the case back to the file of the Commissioner for decision afresh.
Making Deposit At One Go After Declaration Of Demonetization Is No Reason For Doubting Cash Sales: Indore ITAT
Case Title: Mohammad Ibraheem Khatri verses ITO
While deleting the addition made by the AO u/s 68 of the Income Tax Act, the Indore ITAT held that once the cash sales and availability of the cash with the assessee is duly supported by the books of account of the assessee, then making deposit at one go in the circumstances after declaration of demonetization cannot be a reason for doubting the availability of cash with the assessee.
Enhancement Made To Taxpayer's Income Without Following Procedures As Per Sec 154, Calls For Re-Adjudication: Bangalore ITAT
Case Title: Manjunath Obaiah verses The Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax
On finding that a vague order has been passed by the AO by reshuffling the addition under different heads of income and without discussing the issue under the provision of section 154(3) of the Income Tax Act, the Bangalore ITAT remitted back the issue to the file of the AO for fresh consideration.
Assessment By AO Can't Be Termed As Prejudicial To Interest Of Revenue If It Doesn't Result In Any Loss To Revenue: Indore ITAT
Case Title: Naresh Chandra Kalwani verses Pr. Commissioner of Income-tax
On finding that the facts of the case do not warrant application of section 263 of the Income Tax Act, the Indore ITAT set aside the revision order passed by PCIT and restored the original assessment-order passed by the AO.
AO Fails To Scrutinize Cash Payments By Assessee Under Lens Of Sec 40A; Indore ITAT Upholds Revisional Interference U/s 263
Case Title: Shri Bharat Jaroli verses Pr. CIT
On finding a lack of inquiry on the part of AO in allowing cash sales, which renders the assessment order erroneous so far as it is prejudicial to the interests of revenue, the Indore ITAT upheld the order of disallowance u/s 40A(3) of the Income Tax Act, passed by Pr. CIT by invoking Section 263.
Once Busines Income Of Wife Accepted During Scrutiny, AO Can't Tax Husband Again Stating Wife Was Not The One Carrying Business: Rajkot ITAT
Case Title: Shri Ketan Prabhulal Dalsaniya verses The DCIT
While accepting on one hand that the income found to be belonging to taxpayer's wife in scrutiny assessment was duly offered to tax, the Rajkot ITAT reprimanded the I-T Department from taking a contrary view and taxing it in the hands of the taxpayer on the ground that his wife was not actually carrying out any business.