ITAT Delhi Judgments — November 2022

The Tribunal held that since the returned income was accepted as such in the assessment order under section 153A, and there was no variation between returned and assessed income, there was no basis for levying penalty under section 271(1)(c). The penalty was deleted.

The Tribunal restored the appeal to the file of the CIT(A) due to the assessee company being under liquidation and inability to produce evidence. The CIT(A) is directed to re-examine the penalty after affording an opportunity to the assessee.

The Tribunal noted the assessee's claim of not receiving the notices due to their location. To ensure justice, the matter was remitted back to the CIT(E) to provide the assessee with an opportunity to be heard.

The Tribunal held that the assessment proceedings were vitiated due to improper or non-service of the notice under Section 148. Furthermore, the additions made on merits were unsustainable as they were not the subject matter of the reopening.

The Tribunal held that since the assessee follows the cash system of accounting and did not receive any payment for the exports in the relevant assessment year, no addition should have been made. Part payment received in a later year was offered to tax in that year.

The Tribunal agreed with the assessee that the appeal should have been dismissed as infructuous, not simply dismissed. The Tribunal modified the CIT(A)'s order to reflect this, allowing the appeals for statistical purposes.

The Tribunal agreed with the assessee that the appeal should have been dismissed as infructuous, not simply dismissed. The Tribunal modified the CIT(A)'s order to reflect this, allowing the appeals for statistical purposes.

The Tribunal found the Pr. CIT's order contradictory, as it computed additions while simultaneously directing the AO to conduct further inquiries. Therefore, the Tribunal remitted the issue back to the Pr. CIT for fresh consideration.