Loading ITAT cases…
420 orders · Page 9 of 9
The Tribunal held that the addition for alleged bogus purchases was unsustainable as it was based on post-search inquiries and not on any material found during the search. The addition on account of the difference between land purchase price and stamp duty value was also deleted as the Assessing Officer failed to refer the matter to the DVO.
The Tribunal held that the addition for alleged bogus purchases was unsustainable as it was based on post-search inquiries and not on any material found during the search. The addition on account of the difference between land purchase price and stamp duty value was also deleted as the Assessing Officer failed to refer the matter to the DVO.
The ITAT found that the assessee had provided sufficient documentation and explanations for the creditworthiness of lenders, capital introduced, and cash sales, which the AO failed to properly investigate. It upheld the CIT(A)'s deletion of additions related to cash deposit, capital introduced, and stock difference. The ITAT also allowed the assessee's appeal regarding additions confirmed by CIT(A) for unsecured loans and capital introduced under Section 68.
The ITAT upheld the decision of the CIT(A), affirming that the assessee had discharged its onus by submitting comprehensive documentation, including ledger accounts, bank statements, confirmations, and IT returns of the lender, to establish its identity, creditworthiness, and genuineness. The tribunal noted that the AO failed to conduct specific enquiries to prove the transactions were sham.
The Tribunal held that the assessee had discharged its onus by providing all relevant documents, including bank statements and financial statements of the lender. The AO failed to conduct specific inquiries to prove the transaction was sham, and reliance on a former director's statement was misplaced.
The Tribunal held that the assessee had discharged its onus by providing all relevant documents, including bank statements and financial statements of the lender. The AO failed to conduct specific inquiries to prove the transaction was sham, and reliance on a former director's statement was misplaced.
The Tribunal held that the CIT(E) erred in rejecting the applications solely on the ground of no actual charitable activity being carried out, as proposed activities can also be considered. The impugned order was set aside.
The Tribunal held that the CIT(E) erred in rejecting the applications solely on the ground of no actual charitable activity being carried out, as proposed activities can also be considered. The impugned order was set aside.
For AY 2020-21 (ITA No. 1868/Del/2023), the Tribunal, following its earlier decision in the assessee's own case, held that the disputed receipts could not be classified as 'royalty' and directed the deletion of the addition of INR 33,11,70,181/-. Consequently, the AO was instructed to recalculate interest and drop penalty proceedings. For AY 2021-22 (ITA No. 3342/Del/2023), the Tribunal applied the same reasoning to similar issues and directed verification of tax rates as per the DTAA and grant of TDS credit.
The Tribunal held that the addition for alleged bogus purchases was unsustainable as it was based on post-search inquiries and not on any material found during the search. The addition on account of the difference between land purchase price and stamp duty value was also deleted as the Assessing Officer failed to refer the matter to the DVO.
The ITAT upheld the CIT(A)'s decision, confirming that the appeal was indeed infructuous. Relying on a previous ITAT order for the same assessee and a Supreme Court judgment, the tribunal concluded that all Income Tax Department dues for the relevant period were extinguished by the IBC resolution plan, making further adjudication unnecessary.
The Tribunal held that the addition for alleged bogus purchases was unsustainable as it was based on post-search inquiries and not on any material found during the search. The addition on account of the difference between land purchase price and stamp duty value was also deleted as the Assessing Officer failed to refer the matter to the DVO.
The Tribunal held that the addition for alleged bogus purchases was unsustainable as it was based on post-search inquiries and not on any material found during the search. The addition on account of the difference between land purchase price and stamp duty value was also deleted as the Assessing Officer failed to refer the matter to the DVO.
The Tribunal held that the addition for alleged bogus purchases was unsustainable as it was based on post-search inquiries and not on any material found during the search. The addition on account of the difference between land purchase price and stamp duty value was also deleted as the Assessing Officer failed to refer the matter to the DVO.
The Tribunal held that the addition for alleged bogus purchases was unsustainable as it was based on post-search inquiries and not on any material found during the search. The addition on account of the difference between land purchase price and stamp duty value was also deleted as the Assessing Officer failed to refer the matter to the DVO.
The ITAT found that the assessee had provided sufficient documentation and explanations for the creditworthiness of lenders, capital introduced, and cash sales, which the AO failed to properly investigate. It upheld the CIT(A)'s deletion of additions related to cash deposit, capital introduced, and stock difference. The ITAT also allowed the assessee's appeal regarding additions confirmed by CIT(A) for unsecured loans and capital introduced under Section 68.
The Income Tax Appellate Tribunal noted that the Ld. Departmental Representative had no objection to the assessee's request. Consequently, the tribunal allowed the appeal to be withdrawn and dismissed it as such.
During the hearing, the counsel for the assessee submitted a request to withdraw the appeal. Consequently, the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal dismissed the appeal as withdrawn.
Considering the binding directions from the NCLT order, the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal dismissed both the appeals filed by the assessee and the revenue, as well as the assessee's cross-objection. The Tribunal granted liberty to both parties to approach it again once the NCLT proceedings are fully completed.
Considering the binding directions from the NCLT order, the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal dismissed both the appeals filed by the assessee and the revenue, as well as the assessee's cross-objection. The Tribunal granted liberty to both parties to approach it again once the NCLT proceedings are fully completed.