ITAT Agra Judgments — July 2023

The Tribunal held that non-receipt of notices due to a change of address, which was duly intimated, constitutes a reasonable cause for non-compliance. Therefore, the penalty levied under section 271(1)(b) should not be imposed.

The Tribunal held that the reopening was invalid as it was done after four years from the end of the assessment year without any new material coming to the AO's notice. The proviso to Section 147 requires failure to disclose material facts for reopening after four years.

The Tribunal held that the Assessing Officer had made reasonable inquiries and obtained necessary confirmations. The CIT's order was set aside as the AO had not overlooked the issue and the CIT acted casually without demonstrating a fallacy in the AO's action.

The Tribunal found that the ex-parte assessment and appeal were completed due to improper service of notices on the old address, which the assessee had not received. Therefore, the matter was remitted back to the Assessing Officer for de novo consideration.

The tribunal allowed the assessee's request to withdraw the appeal. Therefore, the appeal filed by the assessee was dismissed as withdrawn.

The Tribunal considered the assessee's request for withdrawal. The appeal filed by the assessee was dismissed as withdrawn.

The Tribunal considered the assessee's request for withdrawal. Accordingly, the appeal filed by the assessee was dismissed as withdrawn.

The Tribunal allowed the assessee's request to withdraw the appeal. Therefore, the appeal filed by the assessee was dismissed as withdrawn.

The Tribunal considered the assessee's request for withdrawal. The appeal was dismissed as withdrawn by the Tribunal.

The Tribunal considered the assessee's request for withdrawal. Consequently, the appeal filed by the assessee was dismissed as withdrawn.

The Tribunal noted that the assessee wished to withdraw the appeal and the revenue had no objection. Therefore, the appeal was dismissed as withdrawn.

The Tribunal dismissed the appeal as withdrawn, granting liberty to the assessee to seek restoration if the dispute settlement under the scheme fails. The Revenue had no objection.

The tribunal considered the assessee's request to withdraw the appeal. The revenue representative had no objection to the withdrawal.

The tribunal considered the assessee's request to withdraw the appeal. The revenue representative had no objection to the withdrawal. Therefore, the appeal was dismissed as withdrawn.