ITAT Agra Judgments — September 2017

The Tribunal held that additions cannot be made solely based on the DVO's report without corroborative evidence. The DVO's report alone is not sufficient to justify additions, especially when no incriminating material was found during the search.

The Tribunal held that the expenses were fixed and necessary to run the business, and were incurred wholly and exclusively for business purposes, despite no active business income. Therefore, the disallowance was incorrect.

The Tribunal held that the assessee appeared to be not interested in prosecuting the appeal. Therefore, the appeal was liable to be dismissed for non-prosecution.

The Tribunal held that since the salary expenditure of Rs. 18,17,520/- was allowed by the Tribunal, the basis for levying penalty to that extent no longer exists. Therefore, the penalty related to this amount is deleted.

The Tribunal held that since the assessee did not appear for the hearing and had not filed any adjournment application, despite proper notice, the appeal was liable to be dismissed for non-prosecution.

The Tribunal held that the mere fact of cash deposits in a bank account, especially when the assessee is a non-filer, does not automatically indicate income escaping assessment. The AO's belief was based on suspicion rather than a rational connection to escapement of income.

The Tribunal held that the CIT(Exemption) did not provide sufficient opportunity for the assessee to be heard and present necessary documents. The order was passed on the same day as the hearing without a proper show-cause notice.

The Tribunal held that the reasons provided by the assessee were sufficient to condone the delay in filing the appeals. The appeals were restored to the CIT(A) for a decision on merits.

The Tribunal found that the assessee was prevented by a sufficient cause from appearing before the CIT(A). Therefore, the matter was remitted back to the CIT(A) for a decision on merits after providing an adequate opportunity of hearing.