ITAT Cuttack Judgments — May 2021

The Tribunal held that the addition of Rs. 28,00,000/- was unsustainable as it amounted to double taxation, having already been taxed in the hands of the Trust. Consequential interest income was also deleted, but an addition related to agricultural income was confirmed.

The Tribunal held that the assessee's statement during the survey was based on credible evidence found, and the lack of timely retraction supported its validity. Therefore, the addition made by the authorities below was sustained.

The Tribunal held that only the profit embedded in the undisclosed receipts should be taxed, directing the AO to tax 5% profit on Rs. 5,11,550. The disallowance of expenses due to lack of vouchers was upheld, and the disallowance of salary to partners was confirmed.

The Tribunal held that the penalty notice issued under section 274 read with section 271(1)(c) was bad in law as it did not specify whether the penalty was for concealment of income or furnishing inaccurate particulars. This was considered a non-application of mind by the Assessing Officer.

The Tribunal held that the appeal was not maintainable due to the low tax effect, as per CBDT Circular No. 17/2019. The appeal was dismissed as withdrawn/not pressed.

The Tribunal held that the penalty notice issued under section 274 read with section 271(1)(c) was bad in law as it did not specify whether the penalty was for concealment of income or furnishing inaccurate particulars. This was considered a non-application of mind by the Assessing Officer.

The Tribunal held that the penalty notice issued under section 274 read with section 271(1)(c) was bad in law as it did not specify whether the penalty was for concealment of income or furnishing inaccurate particulars. This was considered a non-application of mind by the Assessing Officer.

The Tribunal found that the assessee was not given a proper opportunity to present its case and that proposed amendments to the bye-laws were submitted. The Revenue had no objection to remitting the matter back to the CIT(Exemptions) for fresh consideration.

The Tribunal held that the reassessment proceedings under Section 147 were initiated without any new tangible material and without proper application of mind by the Assessing Officer, merely based on a suggestion from the CIT(A). Therefore, the reassessment proceedings were quashed.