ITAT Chennai Judgments — November 2018

The Tribunal decided that the CBDT circular regarding withdrawal of appeals with a tax effect below Rs. 20 lakhs is binding. Therefore, the Revenue's appeals were dismissed. The assessee did not wish to press their cross-objections, so they were dismissed as withdrawn.

The Tribunal noted that the tax effect was less than Rs. 20,00,000/-. Therefore, the appeal of the Revenue could not be sustained.

The Tribunal set aside the CIT(A)'s orders and remitted the assessments back to the AO for a fresh, denovo examination. The AO was directed to provide adequate opportunity to the assessee and decide the matters afresh.

The Tribunal set aside the CIT(A)'s orders and remitted the assessments back to the AO for a fresh, denovo examination. The AO was directed to provide adequate opportunity to the assessee and decide the matters afresh.

The Tribunal held that no addition could be made in the hands of the assessee for AY 2014-15 as there was no investment or sale of property during the year under consideration. The Tribunal also noted that no addition was made in the hands of the assessee's husband for the same loan in AY 2014-15.

The Tribunal held that for the purpose of computing fair market value under Section 50C, the guideline value on the date of the agreement for sale should be considered, not the date of the sale deed execution.

The Tribunal held that in the absence of any evidence produced by the assessee, and considering the non-cooperation and inconsistent explanations regarding the loss of books, there was no error in the orders of the lower authorities.

The Tribunal held that the CBDT Circular No. 3/2018, which instructs officers to withdraw appeals with a tax effect below ₹20 lakhs, is binding. Therefore, the Revenue could not proceed with these appeals.

The Tribunal held that the CBDT Circular No. 3/2018, which instructs officers to withdraw appeals with a tax effect below ₹20 lakhs, is binding. Therefore, the Revenue could not proceed with these appeals.

The Tribunal held that in the absence of any evidence produced by the assessee, and considering the non-cooperation and inconsistent explanations regarding the loss of books, there was no error in the orders of the lower authorities.

The Tribunal held that the CBDT Circular No. 3/2018, which instructs officers to withdraw appeals with a tax effect below ₹20 lakhs, is binding. Therefore, the Revenue could not proceed with these appeals.

The Tribunal noted that CBDT Circular No. 3/2018 instructs officers to withdraw appeals with a tax effect below ₹20 lakhs. Following this circular, the Tribunal held that the Revenue could not proceed with these appeals.

The Tribunal held that the Assessing Officer cannot reopen an assessment and overturn a previous order of the Tribunal by collecting new evidence after the fact. The Adangal extract, being an official record, should prevail over the oral statement of a revenue official.