Yearly Archive: 2020

Supreme Court on 24.4.2020 held that no addition u/s 68 can be allowed when the CIT ‎Appeal deleted the penalty on the same credit entry on the ground that the assessee establish ‎the credentials. High Court also held that when the books of accounts rejected for GP ‎addition purpose, but then, if those books of accounts did disclose certain other assets, ‎which are wrongly shown to be liabilities, and for acquisition of which the assessee did ‎not show the source, it cannot be said that the Assessing Officer was not entitled to use ‎the books of accounts for this purpose.‎ Basir Ahmed Sisodiya Vs. ITO

SC-Section 68-271(1)(c)-GP Rate-addition Supreme Court on 24.4.2020 held that no addition u/s 68 can be allowed when the CIT Appeal deleted the penalty on the same credit entry on the ground that the assessee establish the credentials. High Court…
Read more

144, 145(3), 271(1)(c), 44AB, 68, AY 1998-99, penalty 271(1)(c), Supreme Court, unexplained cash credit

ITAT Delhi on 31st jan; 2019 held that CIT(A) could not enhance income of assessee on ‎altogether ‘new Source’.‎ before submitting your written submission kindly read carefully the notes and read case laws mentioned.

ITAT Delhi on 31st jan; 2019 held that CIT(A) could not enhance income of assessee on altogether ‘new Source’. HARI MOHAN SHARMA & ANR. vs. ASSISSTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX & ANR. IN THE ITAT DELHI BENCH ‘E’ S. SIDHU,…
Read more

147, 148, 151, 151(1)(a), 263-Revision of orders prejudicial to revenue, 54F, AY 2014-15, In Favour of Assessee, Matter remanded

ITAT KOLKATA on Mar 13, 2020 quashed the reopening of assessment and allow this appeal of the assessee on the ground that the re-opening is bad in law as the Assessing Officer has not independently applied his mind to the material and recorded reasons which are vague and merely based on borrowed satisfaction.

ITAT KOLKATA on Mar 13, 2020 quashed the reopening of assessment and allow this appeal of the assessee on the ground that the re-opening is bad in law as the Assessing Officer has not independently applied his mind to the…
Read more

147, AY 2011-12, bogus, borrowed satisfaction, In Favour of Assessee, Kolkata tribunal, Reason recorded, Satisfaction

What are the consequences when the notice u/s 143(2) served without examining the return filed in compliance of notice.? The answer is given by ITAT DELHI on 20 February, 2020 in the case of ‎Ananya Portfolio (P) Ltd. v. ITO- IT-CASES-203-2020. Assessment quashed.

ITAT DELHI on 20 February, 2020 held that the provisions of s. 143(2) make it clear that the notice can only be served after the assessing officer has examined the return filed by the assessee. Whereas it is clear that…
Read more

143(2), 143(3), 148, Authority, AY 2009-10, AY 2010-11, Delhi, Delhi Tribunal, H.S. SIDHU, In Favour of Assessee, J.M.‎

Section 147, 132 Gujarat High Court on 25 February, 2020 held that when Search and seizure of incriminating ‎material is at third party and have not in the name of or in hand writings or signature of the ‎assessee, also no such transaction is with third party then in the absence of any other ‎independent material to corroborate the statement of third party no addition can be made.‎ it-cases-205-2020

Gujarat High Court on 25 February, 2020 held that when Search and seizure of incriminating material is at third party and have not in the name of or in hand writings or signature of the assessee, also no such transaction…
Read more

132, 143(3), 147, 68, AY 2006-07, Gujrat High Court, In Favour of Assessee, incriminating material

ITAT VISAKHAPATNAM on 26 February, 2020- Search and Seizure operations- Once the ‎assessee has explained the way in which he derived income and also the purpose for which it ‎is utilized, it is not necessary for the assessee being an educational society to substantiate ‎further with the source of the income received in view of section 115BBC(2)&(3) of the Act. ‎Therefore, in view of the facts and circumstances of the case, we find that the assessee has ‎fulfilled all the conditions laid down in Section 271AAB(1)(a), therefore penalty at 10% is ‎leviable (instead of 30%) in this case.‎ As per section 115BBC, any trust or institution received anonymous donations, is not ‎necessary to mention identity/address and other particulars in the books.‎

ITAT VISAKHAPATNAM on 26 February, 2020- Search and Seizure operations- Once the assessee has explained the way in which he derived income and also the purpose for which it is utilized, it is not necessary for the assessee being an…
Read more

115BBC(2), 115BC(3), 271AAB, 271AAB(!0(a), 271AAB(1), AY 2013-14, AY 2014-15, In Favour of Assessee, VISAKHAPATNAM BENCH

ITAT Banglore on 13th December, 2019 Penny Stock-Penny Stock-When proved that share transactions are tailor made then the submission that transactions are through recognised stock exchange, through banking channels or not allowed cross examination are not acceptable. The claim is required to be proven to be illegitimate by providing all relevant documents to establish sound financial of alledged companies and that fluctuation in price was market driven and to establish genuineness of sale and purchase of alledged scripts. Remanded. Ramesh Chand Kothari (Huf) vs ITO AY 2015-16

ITAT – Bangalore Ramesh Chand Kothari (Huf) , … vs Income Tax Officer Ward-2(2)(1), … on 13 December, 2019 held that in case Penny Stock- Penny Stock-where statement and report of third parties are only secondary and subordinate material which…
Read more

10(38), 68, AY 2015-16, Bangalore Tribunal, Penny stock, Remand

Madras High Court decision on 5 March, 2020 on stay of demand-consequences of not ‎depositing of 20% of total demand within 30 days alongwith stay application- CBDT’s ‎instruction on stay of demand

Madras High Court decision on 5 March, 2020 on stay of demand-consequences of not depositing of 20% of total demand within 30 days alongwith stay application- CBDT’s instruction on stay of demand, IN THE MADRAS HIGH COURT S.S. SUNDAR…
Read more

226, 226(3), Appeal dismissed, AY 2012-13, AY 2013-14, AY 2014-15, AY 2015-16, AY 2016-17, AY 2017-18, madras High Court

ITAT DELHI on Mar 11, 2020 held in Penny stock- The assessee submitted sufficient ‎documentary evidences before A.O. The A.O. has not brought any adverse material against the ‎assessee so as to make the above additions. The interim order of the SEBI have been revoked ‎against the assessee. The denial of right of cross-examination is a flaw which renders the ‎assessment order a nullity. Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of Kishanchand Chellaram 125 ‎ITR 713 (SC) and Andaman Timber Industries vs., CCE 314 ELT 641.‎

ITAT DELHI on Mar 11, 2020 held in Penny stock- The assessee submitted sufficient documentary evidences before A.O. The A.O. has not brought any adverse material against the assessee so as to make the above additions. The interim order of…
Read more

10(38), 68, AY 2014-15, Delhi, Delhi Tribunal, In Favour of Assessee

ITAT Ahmedabad on 11th March, 2020-Diary seized, surrender made and survey statement recorded under section 133A. But having no corroborative evidences. Exorbitant profit is not possible in the line of business of the assessee. No other business is found. No unexplained investment is found. It was held that Since it is business receipt only GP based on past history can be added as income.

Diary seized, surrender made and survey statement recorded under section 133A. But having no corroborative evidences. Exorbitant profit is not possible in the line of business of the assessee. No other business is found. No unexplained investment is found. It…
Read more

133A, 234A, 292C, Ahmedabad Tribunal, AY 2013-14, In favour of Assessee (Partly), Survey