ITAT Amritsar Judgments — June 2023

SMT.GEETANJALI MAHAJAN,JALANDHAR vs INCOME TAX OFFICER WARD-1 (5), JALANDHAR

ITA 97/ASR/2023[2012-13]Status: Heard14 Jun 2023AY 2012-13Allowed

The Tribunal quashed the penalty levied under section 271(1)(c). It relied on the jurisdictional High Court's decision in CIT vs. Rajiv Garg, stating that when additional income is offered in good faith to buy peace, and the explanation is not rejected as mala fide, penalty is not leviable.

SHRI RAMAN GUPTA,AMRITSAR vs DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX CENTRAL CIRCLE, AMRITSAR

ITA 66/ASR/2023[2019-20]Status: Disposed14 Jun 2023AY 2019-20Allowed

The Tribunal held that the surrendered income, being related to business transactions like excess cash and stock, should be treated as business income. The addition under Section 69 and taxation under Section 115BBE were deemed incorrect as the source of the income was identifiable with the business.

SHRI AMANDEEP SINGH,KAPURTHALA vs DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX CENTRAL CIRCLE-1, JALANDHAR

ITA 59/ASR/2023[2017-18]Status: Heard14 Jun 2023AY 2017-18Allowed

The Tribunal held that the CIT(A) enhanced the income without issuing a proper show cause notice to the assessee, violating Section 251(2). The Tribunal also found that the addition of sundry creditors was not justified.

PUNNU SYNTHETICS PRIVATE LIMITED,AMRITSAR vs INCOME TAX OFFICER WARD- 5 (4), AMRITSAR

ITA 35/ASR/2023[2017-18]Status: Disposed14 Jun 2023AY 2017-18Allowed

The Tribunal held that the assessment framed under section 144 was not sustainable due to the non-issuance of a valid statutory notice under section 143(2) within the prescribed time. Consequently, the additions made were deleted.

MEASAGE. HARYANA PLAST PRIVATE LIMITED,HOSHIARPUR vs PRINCIPAL COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX -1, JALANDHAR

ITA 299/ASR/2019[2014-15]Status: Heard14 Jun 2023AY 2014-15Allowed

The Tribunal held that the AO had conducted verification under limited scrutiny as per CASS system and the PCIT failed to provide material showing the AO's view was contrary to law or erroneous. Therefore, the PCIT was not justified in setting aside the AO's order.

M/S. SATIA INDUSTRIES LIMITED,MUKTSAR vs DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX CIRCLE-1, BATHINDA

ITA 193/ASR/2022[2018-19]Status: Disposed13 Jun 2023AY 2018-19Allowed

The Tribunal held that the income from the sale/transfer of RECs/ESCs is capital in nature and not liable to tax as business income. It also held that the addition of Rs. 4,57,32,318/- as bogus expenditure is quashed due to lack of evidence and violation of natural justice.

SURJIT MEMORIAL EDUCATIONAL SOCIETY,FEROZEPUR vs INCOME TAX OFFICER ( EXEMPTIONS ) WARD, AMRITSAR

ITA 202/ASR/2022[2018-19]Status: Disposed13 Jun 2023AY 2018-19Dismissed

The Tribunal held that the levy of late fee under Section 234E is applicable for delayed filing of TDS statements, especially for assessment years post-June 1, 2015. The assessee's contention regarding the applicability of provisions was not accepted.

M/S ALNOOR CHARITABLE EDUCATIONAL TRUST,SRINAGAR vs CO MMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (EXEMPTIONS), CHANDIGARH

ITA 17/ASR/2018[2017-18]Status: Disposed13 Jun 2023AY 2017-18Remanded

The Tribunal held that the interpretation of Section 2(15) had changed, and the trust might be carrying on commercial activities. Therefore, the matter was remanded back to the CIT(Exemptions) to adjudicate the 80G(5) approval in light of the amended provisions of Section 2(15) upon filing a fresh application.

M/S JAMMU COOPERATIVE WHOLE SALE LIMITED,JAMMU vs INCOME TAX OFFICER WARD-2 (1), JAMMU

ITA 150/ASR/2020[2005-06]Status: Disposed13 Jun 2023AY 2005-06Dismissed

The Tribunal upheld the CIT(A)'s decision that claims not made in original assessment proceedings cannot be agitated in reassessment proceedings unless related to escaped income. The Tribunal also found no error in the CIT(A)'s decision regarding the Section 40A(3) addition, directing the AO to re-examine it in light of amended provisions.

NAVJEEVAN CHARITABLE SOCIETY FOR INTEGRAL DEVELOPMENT,JALANDHAR vs PRINCIPAL COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX ( CENTRAL), LUDHINANA

ITA 25/ASR/2021[2016-17]Status: Disposed13 Jun 2023AY 2016-17Allowed

The Tribunal held that the PCIT's order was infirm and perverse because it failed to address a crucial issue regarding the source of corpus donations received in cash, despite the assessee providing details. The PCIT improperly set aside the AO's order without proper consideration of the assessee's submissions.

THE KOT RAM DASS COOP. THIRFT & CREDIT SOCIETY LIMITED,JALANDHAR vs INCOME TAX OFFICER WARD-2 (4), JALANDHAR

ITA 86/ASR/2021[2017-18]Status: Disposed13 Jun 2023AY 2017-18Allowed

The Tribunal held that interest earned by a cooperative society from investments in cooperative banks is eligible for deduction under Section 80P(2)(d) of the Income Tax Act. The Tribunal distinguished the Supreme Court's ruling in Totgar Cooperative Sales Society Ltd., noting it did not specifically address Section 80P(2)(d).

SHRI JATINDER SINGH,AMRITSAR vs ADDITIONAL COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX RANGE-1, AMRITSAR

ITA 231/ASR/2022[2018-19]Status: Disposed13 Jun 2023AY 2018-19Remanded

The Tribunal held that the CIT(A) erred in penalizing the appellant without providing them a copy of the sale deed and adequate opportunity to be heard, violating principles of natural justice. The matter was restored to the CIT(A) for fresh adjudication.

SURJIT MEMORIAL EDUCATIONAL SOCIETY,FEROZEPUR vs INCOME TAX OFFICER ( EXEMPTIONS ) WARD, AMRITSAR

ITA 203/ASR/2022[2019-20]Status: Disposed13 Jun 2023AY 2019-20Dismissed

The Tribunal held that the levy of late fee under Section 234E is applicable for delayed filing of TDS statements, especially for assessment years post-June 1, 2015. The assessee's contention regarding the applicability of provisions was not accepted.

SHRI SALIL BHATIA,AMRITSAR vs ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX CENTRAL CIRCLE, AMRITSAR

ITA 60/ASR/2023[2013-14]Status: Disposed13 Jun 2023AY 2013-14Allowed

The Tribunal held that the assessment order was invalid as no incriminating material was found during the requisition under section 132A. The decision of the CIT(A) was deemed infirm and bad in law.

MEASAGE G. H AGRO PRODUCTS PRIVATE LIMITED,AMRITSAR vs DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX CENTRAL CIRCLE, AMRITSAR

ITA 22/ASR/2020[2008-09]Status: Disposed9 Jun 2023AY 2008-09Allowed

The Tribunal held that the approval granted by the Additional Commissioner under Section 153D was mechanical and lacked application of mind, rendering the assessment orders invalid. Consequently, the assessments were quashed.

MEASAGE G.H AGRO PRIVATE LIMITED,AMRITSAR vs DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX CENTRAL CIRCLE, AMRITSAR

ITA 21/ASR/2020[2014-15]Status: Disposed9 Jun 2023AY 2014-15Allowed

The Tribunal held that the approval granted by the Additional Commissioner under Section 153D was mechanical and lacked application of mind, rendering the assessment orders invalid. Consequently, the assessments were quashed.

MEASEG G.H AGRO PRODUCTS PRIVATE LIMITED,AMRITSAR vs DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX CENTRAL CIRCLE, AMRITSAR

ITA 18/ASR/2020[2011-12]Status: Disposed9 Jun 2023AY 2011-12Allowed

The Tribunal held that the approval granted by the Additional Commissioner under Section 153D was mechanical and lacked application of mind, rendering the assessment orders invalid. Consequently, the assessments were quashed.

MEASAGE SAT KARTAR SOLVEX PRIVATE LIMITED,FEROZEPUR vs DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX CENTRAL CIRCLE, AMRITSAR

ITA 24/ASR/2020[2010-11]Status: Disposed9 Jun 2023AY 2010-11Allowed

The Tribunal held that the approval granted by the Additional Commissioner under Section 153D was mechanical and lacked application of mind, rendering the assessment orders invalid. Consequently, the assessments were quashed.

MEASAGE G. H AGRO PRODUCTS PRIVATE LIMITED,AMRITSAR vs DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX CENTRAL CIRCLE, AMRITSAR

ITA 23/ASR/2020[2009-10]Status: Disposed9 Jun 2023AY 2009-10Allowed

The Tribunal held that the approval granted by the Additional Commissioner under Section 153D was mechanical and lacked application of mind, rendering the assessment orders invalid. Consequently, the assessments were quashed.

MEASAGE.G H AGRO PRODUCTS PRIVATE LIMITED,AMRITSAR vs DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX CENTRAL CIRCLE, AMRITSAR

ITA 20/ASR/2020[2013-14]Status: Disposed9 Jun 2023AY 2013-14Allowed

The Tribunal held that the approval granted by the Additional Commissioner under Section 153D was mechanical and lacked application of mind, rendering the assessment orders invalid. Consequently, the assessments were quashed.

MEASAGE G.H AGRO PRODUCTS PRIVATE LIMITED,AMRITSAR vs DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX CENTRAL CIRCLE, AMRITSAR

ITA 17/ASR/2020[2010-11]Status: Disposed9 Jun 2023AY 2010-11Allowed

The Tribunal held that the approval granted by the Additional Commissioner under Section 153D was mechanical and lacked application of mind, rendering the assessment orders invalid. Consequently, the assessments were quashed.

MEASAGE G H AGRO PRODUCTS PRIVATE LIMITED,AMRITSAR vs DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX CENTRAL CIRCLE, AMRITSAR

ITA 19/ASR/2020[2012-13]Status: Disposed9 Jun 2023AY 2012-13Allowed

The Tribunal held that the approval granted by the Additional Commissioner under Section 153D was mechanical and lacked application of mind, rendering the assessment orders invalid. Consequently, the assessments were quashed.

MEASAGE SAT KARTAR SOLVEX PRIVATE LIMITED,FEROZEPUR vs DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX CENTRAL CIRCLE, AMRITSAR

ITA 16/ASR/2020[2001-12]Status: Disposed9 Jun 2023AY 2001-12Allowed

The Tribunal held that the approval granted by the Additional Commissioner under Section 153D was mechanical and lacked application of mind, rendering the assessment orders invalid. Consequently, the assessments were quashed.

M/S NARULA FOODS PRIVATE LIMITED,FEROZEPUR vs DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX CENTRAL CIRCLE, AMRITSAR

ITA 79/ASR/2020[2013-14]Status: Disposed9 Jun 2023AY 2013-14Allowed

The Tribunal held that the approval granted by the Additional Commissioner under Section 153D was mechanical and lacked application of mind, rendering the assessment orders invalid. Consequently, the assessments were quashed.

M/S NARULA FOODS PRIVATE LIMITED,FEROZEPUR vs DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX CENTRAL CIRCLE, AMRITSAR

ITA 78/ASR/2020[2012-13]Status: Disposed9 Jun 2023AY 2012-13Allowed

The Tribunal held that the approval granted by the Additional Commissioner under Section 153D was mechanical and lacked application of mind, rendering the assessment orders invalid. Consequently, the assessments were quashed.

M/S NARULA FOODS PRIVATE LIMITED,FEROZEPUR vs DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX CENTRAL CIRCLE, AMRITSAR

ITA 76/ASR/2020[2010-11]Status: Disposed9 Jun 2023AY 2010-11Allowed

The Tribunal held that the approval granted by the Additional Commissioner under Section 153D was mechanical and lacked application of mind, rendering the assessment orders invalid. Consequently, the assessments were quashed.

M/S NARULA FOODS PRIVATE LIMITED,FEROZEPUR vs DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX CENTRAL CIRCLE, AMRITSAR

ITA 77/ASR/2020[2011-12]Status: Disposed9 Jun 2023AY 2011-12Allowed

The Tribunal held that the approval granted by the Additional Commissioner under Section 153D was mechanical and lacked application of mind, rendering the assessment orders invalid. Consequently, the assessments were quashed.

M/S NARULA OIL & FATS PRIVATE LIMITED,AHEMDABAD vs DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX CENTRAL CIRCLE, AMRITSAR

ITA 65/ASR/2020[2010-11]Status: Disposed9 Jun 2023AY 2010-11Allowed

The Tribunal held that the approval granted by the Additional Commissioner under Section 153D was mechanical and lacked application of mind, rendering the assessment orders invalid. Consequently, the assessments were quashed.

ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX CENTRAL CIRCLE, AMRITSAR vs M/S NARULA OIL & FATS PRIVTE LIMITED, AHMEDABAD

ITA 59/ASR/2020[2013-14]Status: Disposed9 Jun 2023AY 2013-14Allowed

The Tribunal held that the approval granted by the Additional Commissioner under Section 153D was mechanical and lacked application of mind, rendering the assessment orders invalid. Consequently, the assessments were quashed.

M/S NARULA OIL & FATS PRIVATE LIMITED,AHEMDABAD vs DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX CENTRAL CIRCLE, AMRITSAR

ITA 67/ASR/2020[2014-15]Status: Disposed9 Jun 2023AY 2014-15Allowed

The Tribunal held that the approval granted by the Additional Commissioner under Section 153D was mechanical and lacked application of mind, rendering the assessment orders invalid. Consequently, the assessments were quashed.

M/S NARULA OIL & FATS PRIVATE LIMITED,AHEMDABAD vs DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX CENTRAL CIRCLE, AMRITSAR

ITA 64/ASR/2020[2009-10]Status: Disposed9 Jun 2023AY 2009-10Allowed

The Tribunal held that the approval granted by the Additional Commissioner under Section 153D was mechanical and lacked application of mind, rendering the assessment orders invalid. Consequently, the assessments were quashed.

M/S NARULA OIL & FATS PRIVATE LIMITED,AHEMDABAD vs DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX CENTRAL CIRCLE, AMRITSAR

ITA 66/ASR/2020[2013-14]Status: Disposed9 Jun 2023AY 2013-14Allowed

The Tribunal held that the approval granted by the Additional Commissioner under Section 153D was mechanical and lacked application of mind, rendering the assessment orders invalid. Consequently, the assessments were quashed.

M/S NARULA OIL & FATS PRIVATE LIMITED,AHEMDABAD vs DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX CENTRAL CIRCLE, AMRITSAR

ITA 63/ASR/2020[2008-09]Status: Disposed9 Jun 2023AY 2008-09Allowed

The Tribunal held that the approval granted by the Additional Commissioner under Section 153D was mechanical and lacked application of mind, rendering the assessment orders invalid. Consequently, the assessments were quashed.

MEASAGE NARULA SOLVEX PRIVATE LIMITED,MOGA vs DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX CENTRAL CIRCLE, AMRITSAR

ITA 34/ASR/2020[2011-12]Status: Disposed9 Jun 2023AY 2011-12Allowed

The Tribunal held that the approval granted by the Additional Commissioner under Section 153D was mechanical and lacked application of mind, rendering the assessment orders invalid. Consequently, the assessments were quashed.

M/S NARULA FOODS PRIVATELIMITED,FEROZEPUR vs DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX CENTRAL CIRCLE, AMRITSAR

ITA 74/ASR/2020[2008-09]Status: Disposed9 Jun 2023AY 2008-09Allowed

The Tribunal held that the approval granted by the Additional Commissioner under Section 153D was mechanical and lacked application of mind, rendering the assessment orders invalid. Consequently, the assessments were quashed.

MEASAGE SAT KARTAR SOLVEX PRIVATE LIMITED,FEROZEPUR vs DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX CENTRAL CIRCLE, AMRITSAR

ITA 27/ASR/2020[2014-15]Status: Disposed9 Jun 2023AY 2014-15Allowed

The Tribunal held that the approval granted by the Additional Commissioner under Section 153D was mechanical and lacked application of mind, rendering the assessment orders invalid. Consequently, the assessments were quashed.

ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX CENTRAL CIRCLE, AMRITSAR vs M/S NARULA OIL & FATS PRIVATE LIMITED, AHMEDABAD

ITA 58/ASR/2020[2012-13]Status: Disposed9 Jun 2023AY 2012-13Allowed

The Tribunal held that the approval granted by the Additional Commissioner under Section 153D was mechanical and lacked application of mind, rendering the assessment orders invalid. Consequently, the assessments were quashed.

MEASAGE SAT KARTAR SOLVEX PRIVATE LIMITED,FEROZEPUR vs DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX CENTRAL CIRCLE, AMRITSAR

ITA 25/ASR/2020[2012-13]Status: Disposed9 Jun 2023AY 2012-13Allowed

The Tribunal held that the approval granted by the Additional Commissioner under Section 153D was mechanical and lacked application of mind, rendering the assessment orders invalid. Consequently, the assessments were quashed.

MEASAGE NARULA SOLVEX PRIVATE LIMITED,MOGA vs DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX CENTRAL CIRCLE, AMRITSAR

ITA 33/ASR/2020[2010-11]Status: Disposed9 Jun 2023AY 2010-11Allowed

The Tribunal held that the approval granted by the Additional Commissioner under Section 153D was mechanical and lacked application of mind, rendering the assessment orders invalid. Consequently, the assessments were quashed.

MEASAGE SAT KARTAR SOLVEX PRIVATE LIMITED,FEROZEPUR vs DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX CENTRAL CIRCLE, AMRITSAR

ITA 26/ASR/2020[2013-14]Status: Disposed9 Jun 2023AY 2013-14Allowed

The Tribunal held that the approval granted by the Additional Commissioner under Section 153D was mechanical and lacked application of mind, rendering the assessment orders invalid. Consequently, the assessments were quashed.

SHRI TIRLOK SONGH THROUGH LEGAL HEIR GURNAM SINGH,GURDASPUR vs INCOME TAX OFFICER WARD, GURDASPUR

ITA 70/ASR/2023[2017-18]Status: Disposed9 Jun 2023AY 2017-18Partly Allowed

The Tribunal deleted the penalty for non-filing of the audit report, finding reasonable cause due to technical glitches. For non-compliance with notices, the penalty was restricted to one instance, as the primary remedy for non-cooperation is best judgment assessment.

M/S NARULA FOODS PRIVATE LIMITED,FEROZEPUR vs DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX CENTRAL CIRCLE, AMRITSAR

ITA 75/ASR/2020[2009-10]Status: Disposed9 Jun 2023AY 2009-10Allowed

The Tribunal held that the approval granted by the Additional Commissioner under Section 153D was mechanical and lacked application of mind, rendering the assessment orders invalid. Consequently, the assessments were quashed.

M/S NARULA FOODS PRIVATE LIMITED,FEROZEPUR vs DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX CENTRAL CIRCLE, AMRITSAR

ITA 80/ASR/2020[2014-15]Status: Disposed9 Jun 2023AY 2014-15Allowed

The Tribunal held that the approval granted by the Additional Commissioner under Section 153D was mechanical and lacked application of mind, rendering the assessment orders invalid. Consequently, the assessments were quashed.

SHRI KULWANT SINGH,TARN-TARAN vs INCOME TAX OFFICER WARD- 1, TARN TARAN

ITA 55/ASR/2023[2011-12]Status: Disposed9 Jun 2023AY 2011-12Remanded

The Tribunal held that the lower authorities erred by passing ex parte orders without granting a proper opportunity of being heard. Principles of natural justice were violated as the claim regarding agricultural income was not addressed.

SHRI ABDUL AZIZ DAR,SRINAGAR vs INCOME TAX OFFICER WARD-1, SRINAGAR

ITA 61/ASR/2023[2016-17]Status: Disposed9 Jun 2023AY 2016-17Remanded

The Tribunal held that the authorities below erred in passing ex parte orders without granting adequate opportunity of being heard and without addressing the merits of the case. Principles of natural justice were violated.

SHRI TIRLOK SINGH THROUGH LEGAL HEIR GURNAM SINGH,GURDASPUR vs INCOME TAX OFFICER WARD, GURDASPUR

ITA 71/ASR/2023[2017-18]Status: Disposed9 Jun 2023AY 2017-18Partly Allowed

The Tribunal deleted the penalty for non-filing of the audit report, finding reasonable cause due to technical glitches. For non-compliance with notices, the penalty was restricted to one instance, as the primary remedy for non-cooperation is best judgment assessment.

MEASAGE NARULA SOLVEX PRIVATE LIMITED,MOGA vs DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX CENTRAL CIRCLE, AMRITSAR

ITA 36/ASR/2020[2013-14]Status: Disposed9 Jun 2023AY 2013-14Allowed

The Tribunal held that the approval granted by the Additional Commissioner under Section 153D was mechanical and lacked application of mind, rendering the assessment orders invalid. Consequently, the assessments were quashed.

MEASAGE NARULA SOLVEX PRIVATE LIMITED,MOGA vs DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX CENTRAL CIRCLE, AMRITSAR

ITA 37/ASR/2020[2014-15]Status: Disposed9 Jun 2023AY 2014-15Allowed

The Tribunal held that the approval granted by the Additional Commissioner under Section 153D was mechanical and lacked application of mind, rendering the assessment orders invalid. Consequently, the assessments were quashed.

MEASAGE NARULA SOLVEX PRIVATE LIMITED,MOGA vs DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX CENTRAL CIRCLE, AMRITSAR

ITA 35/ASR/2020[2012-13]Status: Disposed9 Jun 2023AY 2012-13Allowed

The Tribunal held that the approval granted by the Additional Commissioner under Section 153D was mechanical and lacked application of mind, rendering the assessment orders invalid. Consequently, the assessments were quashed.

M/S NARULA OIL & FATS PRIVATE LIMITED,AHEMDABAD vs DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX CENTRAL CIRCLE, AMRITSAR

ITA 69/ASR/2020[2012-13]Status: Disposed9 Jun 2023AY 2012-13Allowed

The Tribunal held that the approval granted by the Additional Commissioner under Section 153D was mechanical and lacked application of mind, rendering the assessment orders invalid. Consequently, the assessments were quashed.