ITAT Delhi Judgments — February 2020

The Tribunal held that the assessees failed to discharge their onus to prove the genuineness of the gifts. The failure to produce donors, coupled with the donors' low income and inability to establish natural love and affection, made the gifts against human probability.

The Tribunal noted that the CIT(A) had failed to adjudicate the crucial ground regarding the non-receipt of statutory notices. Therefore, the Tribunal set aside the order and remanded the matter back to the CIT(A) for a fresh decision on this legal issue.

The Tribunal noted that the Assessing Officer accepted the assessee's Percentage of Completion Method (POCM) of accounting. However, the AO did not verify if the income was offered in subsequent years. Therefore, the issue was restored to the AO for verification.

The Tribunal set aside the disallowance of 50% of land improvement expenditure to the Assessing Officer for re-examination, directing the assessee to substantiate the claim. Similarly, the issue of deduction under Section 54B for 'Bayana' payment was remanded to the Assessing Officer for the assessee to prove its claim.

The Tribunal upheld the addition of Rs 16,52,905/- as the assessee failed to provide cogent evidence for the sales difference, with parties denying sales returns. The disallowance of Rs 15,00,000/- was also confirmed as the assessee admitted it was not for the impugned assessment year.