Loading ITAT cases…
108 orders · Page 3 of 3
The Tribunal held that while the CIT(E)'s action of proceeding ex-parte based on non-compliance could not be faulted per se, considering the assessee's claim of being an old charitable institution with prior registrations and approvals, the ends of substantial justice would be met by granting one more effective opportunity. The Tribunal acknowledged the assessee's failure to respond to notices but emphasized that issues relating to registration and approval involve examination of objects, genuineness of activities, and statutory compliance. Therefore, in the interest of justice, the matter deserved fresh consideration. Consequently, the impugned orders of the CIT(E) were set aside, and both appeals were restored to the file of the CIT(E) for fresh adjudication. The assessee was directed to furnish all requisite documents and evidence, and the CIT(E) was authorized to conduct necessary inquiries. The Tribunal also cautioned the assessee against seeking unnecessary adjournments, stating that failure to comply would allow the CIT(E) to decide based on available material. The appeals were allowed for statistical purposes.
The Tribunal held that while the CIT(E)'s action of proceeding ex-parte based on non-compliance could not be faulted per se, considering the assessee's claim of being an old charitable institution with prior registrations and approvals, the ends of substantial justice would be met by granting one more effective opportunity. The Tribunal acknowledged the assessee's failure to respond to notices but emphasized that issues relating to registration and approval involve examination of objects, genuineness of activities, and statutory compliance. Therefore, in the interest of justice, the matter deserved fresh consideration. Consequently, the impugned orders of the CIT(E) were set aside, and both appeals were restored to the file of the CIT(E) for fresh adjudication. The assessee was directed to furnish all requisite documents and evidence, and the CIT(E) was authorized to conduct necessary inquiries. The Tribunal also cautioned the assessee against seeking unnecessary adjournments, stating that failure to comply would allow the CIT(E) to decide based on available material. The appeals were allowed for statistical purposes.
The Tribunal condoned the delay in filing the appeals and, considering the assessee's non-compliance, granted one final opportunity to substantiate its case before the CIT(A) upon payment of costs.
The Tribunal found that the rejection was based on technical/clerical defects in filing the application rather than any adverse findings on the genuineness of activities. Therefore, the matter was restored to the CIT(E) for fresh adjudication.
The Tribunal, invoking principles of natural justice and acknowledging potential communication issues in the faceless regime, set aside the CIT(A)'s order. The case was restored to the CIT(A) for a de novo adjudication, with a direction to the assessee to present its case forthwith.
The ITAT held that the CIT(A) failed to properly adjudicate the jurisdictional issue of reassessment proceedings against a deceased person and the computation of capital gains on inherited property. The tribunal found that the CIT(A)'s order lacked proper examination of facts and legal principles.
The Tribunal found merit in the assessee's contention regarding the anomaly in cash balance reconciliation. The matter was restored to the CIT(A) for fresh adjudication after proper reconciliation and hearing.
The Tribunal held that interest on enhanced compensation is taxable under Section 56(2)(viii) after the amendments by the Finance Act, 2009, following a coordinate bench decision. Legal grounds regarding reassessment proceedings were dismissed due to assessee's participation and lack of demonstrated prejudice.