ITAT Agra Judgments — May 2018

The Tribunal held that prior to June 1, 2015, there was no enabling provision under Section 200A of the Act to levy late fee under Section 234E. Therefore, such levy for periods before this date was invalid.

The Tribunal held that prior to June 1, 2015, there was no enabling provision under Section 200A of the Act to levy late fee under Section 234E. Therefore, such levy for periods before this date was invalid.

The tribunal held that the assessee was not interested in pursuing the appeal further due to their non-appearance. Consequently, the appeal was dismissed for non-prosecution.

The Tribunal held that the penalty notices issued under Section 274 were nebulous and not in conformity with the law, violating the principles of natural justice. Consequently, the notices and all proceedings based thereon were quashed.

The Tribunal held that suppressed sales cannot be taxed as income, only the net profit part is taxable. It directed the AO to apply a net profit rate of 2.7% on the estimated sales, subject to the minimum returned income.

The Tribunal held that the disallowances related to payments for labour and transportation, and write-off of temporary structures, were invalid as the revisional order of the CIT was set aside by the ITAT. Regarding rent for equipment, the Tribunal found that payments were made to different persons below the TDS threshold, thus deleting the disallowance.

The Tribunal held that suppressed sales cannot be taxed as income, only the net profit part is taxable. It directed the AO to apply a net profit rate of 2.7% on the estimated sales, subject to the minimum returned income.

The Tribunal held that the CIT(A) erred in applying Section 44AD as the turnover exceeded the limit. It directed the application of a profit rate based on the assessee's past history. The addition for unexplained capital introduction was ordered to be telescoped against the trading addition, and the addition under Section 43B was deleted.

The Tribunal quashed the penalty notice and all subsequent proceedings, holding that the notice issued under section 274 read with section 271(1)(c) was not in conformity with the law and was void ab initio. This decision was based on previous judgments where similar notices were found to be non-specific.

The Tribunal held that the AO failed to demonstrate an independent application of mind to the information received from the Investigation Wing. The reasons recorded did not show a direct nexus between the information and the belief of escapement of income, making the reassessment proceedings unsustainable.