ITAT Dehradun Judgments — August 2023

The Tribunal noted that the CIT(A) did not adjudicate the ground regarding the non-supply of reasons for reopening and passed a cryptic order on merits. Therefore, the appeal was restored to the CIT(A) for fresh adjudication of all grounds.

The Tribunal noted that as per CBDT Circular No. 21/2015, appeals with a tax effect below Rs. 50 lakhs should not be preferred. Therefore, the appeal filed by the Revenue was not maintainable.

The Tribunal had previously deleted the additions/disallowances in the quantum appeal. Therefore, the penalty levied on the basis of these deleted additions could not survive.

The Tribunal held that the assessment year 2010-11 was a concluded assessment as of the date of receipt of seized documents. Since no incriminating material was found for this AY, the AO could not disturb the earlier assessment. The assessment framed under Section 153C was quashed.

The Tribunal noted that the CIT(A)'s order was based on a previous year's order which was subsequently quashed. Therefore, the Tribunal restored the appeal to the CIT(A) for fresh adjudication, uninfluenced by the prior decision.

The Tribunal held that the employee's contribution to PF and ESI, if not deposited by the statutory due dates, cannot be allowed as a deduction, even if deposited before the return filing due date. This is based on the Supreme Court's decision in Checkmate Services Pvt. Ltd.

The Tribunal noted that the assessee had settled the quantum appeal under the Direct Tax Vivad Se Vishwas Scheme, 2020. Since the entire quantum was settled, the penalty automatically became non-enforceable.