Loading ITAT cases…
68 orders · Page 1 of 2
The Tribunal condoned the one-day delay in filing the appeal before the CIT(Appeals). The Tribunal decided to provide the assessee another opportunity to substantiate their case and remitted the matter back to the CIT(Appeals) for fresh adjudication.
The Tribunal condoned the delay in filing the appeal before the CIT(Appeals) and remitted the matter back for fresh adjudication. The assessee was granted an opportunity to present evidence to ensure natural justice.
The Tribunal found that the assessee did not properly participate in the reassessment proceedings and failed to provide necessary documentation. Therefore, the case was restored to the Assessing Officer for a fresh examination.
The Tribunal found that the assessee did not properly participate in the reassessment proceedings and failed to provide necessary documentation. Therefore, the case was restored to the Assessing Officer for a fresh examination.
The Tribunal found that the assessee did not properly participate in the reassessment proceedings and failed to provide necessary documentation. Therefore, the case was restored to the Assessing Officer for a fresh examination.
The Tribunal condoned the delay in filing the Revenue's appeals. For AY 2016-17, the CIT(A)'s order was set aside and the matter was remanded to the AO for de novo assessment. For AY 2018-19, the CIT(A)'s order was also set aside and remanded to the AO for reassessment.
The Tribunal condoned the delay in filing the Revenue's appeals. For AY 2016-17, the CIT(A)'s order was set aside and the matter was remanded to the AO for de novo assessment. For AY 2018-19, the CIT(A)'s order was also set aside and remanded to the AO for reassessment.
The Tribunal noted that the assessee subsequently obtained registration under Sections 12A and 80G, but the lower authorities had not properly examined these documents. Therefore, the matter was set aside to the Assessing Officer for fresh adjudication.
The Tribunal noted that the assessee subsequently obtained registration under Sections 12A and 80G, but the lower authorities had not properly examined these documents. Therefore, the matter was set aside to the Assessing Officer for fresh adjudication.
The Tribunal restored both the quantum appeal and the penalty appeal to the Assessing Officer for fresh adjudication. The assessee was directed to furnish all supporting documents, and a cost of Rs. 10,000 was imposed on the assessee for non-compliance.
The Tribunal, considering that substantial justice should prevail over technicalities, granted the assessee one more opportunity to substantiate its claims. The matter was restored to the Assessing Officer for fresh adjudication after providing an opportunity of being heard.
The Tribunal, considering that substantial justice should prevail over technicalities, granted the assessee one more opportunity to substantiate its claims. The matter was restored to the Assessing Officer for fresh adjudication after providing an opportunity of being heard.
The Tribunal found that the assessment order was passed ex parte and the assessee did not diligently pursue the matter before the lower authorities. Therefore, the Tribunal decided to remand the entire issue back to the Assessing Officer for a fresh examination, providing the assessee with a reasonable opportunity to be heard.
The Tribunal reduced the estimated profit from 6% to 4% of turnover for one assessment year, granting partial relief. For the other assessment year, the issue of the Rs. 25,00,000 bank withdrawal was restored to the Assessing Officer for verification.
The Tribunal reduced the estimated profit from 6% to 4% of turnover for one assessment year, granting partial relief. For the other assessment year, the issue of the Rs. 25,00,000 bank withdrawal was restored to the Assessing Officer for verification.
The Tribunal restored both the quantum appeal and the penalty appeal to the Assessing Officer for fresh adjudication. The assessee was directed to furnish all supporting documents, and a cost of Rs. 10,000 was imposed on the assessee for non-compliance.
The Tribunal set aside the orders of the CIT(A) and restored the matters to the Assessing Officer for de novo reassessment, providing the assessee with an opportunity to be heard. Some appeals were dismissed as infructuous.
The Tribunal condoned the delay, set aside the CIT(A)'s orders, and restored the appeals to the CIT(A) for disposal on merits. The assessee was granted an opportunity to be heard, and the AO was also to be heard if required.
The Tribunal condoned the delay, set aside the CIT(A)'s orders, and restored the appeals to the CIT(A) for disposal on merits. The assessee was granted an opportunity to be heard, and the AO was also to be heard if required.
The Tribunal condoned the delay in filing the appeals and, considering the interest of justice, restored the matter to the Assessing Officer for fresh examination. The assessee was directed to provide supporting documents and comply with notices.
The Tribunal condoned the delay in filing the appeal and, in the interest of justice, restored the matter to the Assessing Officer for a fresh examination. The assessee was directed to provide supporting documents and cooperate with the proceedings.
The Tribunal set aside the CIT(A)'s order and remanded the matter back to the AO for de novo reassessment. This was done to provide the assessee with a proper opportunity of being heard, given the lack of compliance before the lower authorities.
The Tribunal set aside the CIT(A)'s order and remanded the matter back to the AO for de novo reassessment. This was done to provide the assessee with a proper opportunity of being heard, given the lack of compliance before the lower authorities.
The Tribunal found that the assessee failed to provide necessary supporting documents to the lower authorities and did not comply effectively with the CIT(A). Therefore, the matter was restored to the CIT(A) for fresh adjudication.
The Tribunal set aside the orders of the CIT(A) and restored the matters to the Assessing Officer for de novo reassessment, providing the assessee with an opportunity to be heard. Some appeals were dismissed as infructuous.
The Tribunal set aside the orders of the CIT(A) and restored the matters to the Assessing Officer for de novo reassessment, providing the assessee with an opportunity to be heard. Some appeals were dismissed as infructuous.
The Tribunal restored the matter to the Assessing Officer for fresh examination after considering the assessee's documents and explanations. The penalty proceedings were also restored to the Assessing Officer.
The Tribunal restored the matter to the Assessing Officer for fresh examination after considering the assessee's documents and explanations. The penalty proceedings were also restored to the Assessing Officer.
The Tribunal found that the assessee's claim for exemption under Section 10(26) and the source of cash required proper verification. Due to the lack of adequate supporting evidence before the lower authorities, the matter was restored to the Assessing Officer for fresh examination.
The Tribunal found that the assessee's claim for exemption under Section 10(26) and the source of cash required proper verification. Due to the lack of adequate supporting evidence before the lower authorities, the matter was restored to the Assessing Officer for fresh examination.
The Tribunal found that the assessee's claim for exemption under Section 10(26) and the source of cash required proper verification. Due to the lack of adequate supporting evidence before the lower authorities, the matter was restored to the Assessing Officer for fresh examination.
The Tribunal found that the assessee's claim for exemption under Section 10(26) and the source of cash required proper verification. Due to the lack of adequate supporting evidence before the lower authorities, the matter was restored to the Assessing Officer for fresh examination.
The Tribunal set aside the orders of the CIT(A) and restored the matters to the Assessing Officer for de novo reassessment, providing the assessee with an opportunity to be heard. Some appeals were dismissed as infructuous.
The Tribunal condoned the delay in filing the appeals and, considering the interest of justice, restored the matter to the Assessing Officer for fresh examination. The assessee was directed to provide supporting documents and comply with notices.
The Tribunal condoned the delay in filing the appeals and, considering the interest of justice, restored the matter to the Assessing Officer for fresh examination. The assessee was directed to provide supporting documents and comply with notices.
The Tribunal condoned the delay, set aside the CIT(A)'s orders, and restored the appeals to the CIT(A) for disposal on merits. The assessee was granted an opportunity to be heard, and the AO was also to be heard if required.
The Tribunal held that it would be improper to adjudicate the penalty appeal in isolation while the quantum appeal is pending. Therefore, the matter was restored to the CIT(A) to decide both appeals simultaneously.
The Tribunal found that the dispute was settled under the Direct Tax Vivad se Vishwas Scheme-2024, as evidenced by Form No. 04. Therefore, no dispute remained for adjudication.
The Tribunal found that the issues required fresh examination at the Assessing Officer's level. The matter was restored to the Assessing Officer for a de novo assessment with an opportunity for the assessee to present evidence.
The Tribunal found that crucial factual aspects regarding the assessee's eligibility for exemption under Section 10(26) were not properly examined by the lower authorities. Therefore, the issue was restored to the Assessing Officer for fresh examination.
The Tribunal held that the CIT(A) erred in accepting additional evidence without giving the AO an opportunity to examine it or calling for a remand report. The order of the CIT(A) was set aside as cryptic.
The Tribunal, in the interest of justice, set aside the CIT(A)'s order and restored the appeal to the CIT(A) for disposal on merits. The assessee was granted one more opportunity to present their case.
The Tribunal found that the CIT(A) erred in dismissing the appeal solely on delay without deciding the merits. The Tribunal restored the appeal to the CIT(A) for a fresh decision on merits, emphasizing the need for a speaking order and an opportunity for the assessee to present their case.
The Tribunal found that crucial factual aspects regarding the assessee's eligibility for exemption under Section 10(26) were not properly examined by the lower authorities. Therefore, the issue was restored to the Assessing Officer for fresh examination.
The Tribunal found that crucial factual aspects regarding the assessee's eligibility for exemption under Section 10(26) were not properly examined by the lower authorities. Therefore, the issue was restored to the Assessing Officer for fresh examination.
The Tribunal restored the issues to the Assessing Officer for fresh examination of the assessee's claim under Section 10(26), after granting an opportunity of being heard and requiring the assessee to furnish relevant documents.
The Tribunal restored the issues to the Assessing Officer for fresh examination of the assessee's claim under Section 10(26), after granting an opportunity of being heard and requiring the assessee to furnish relevant documents.
The Tribunal held that the CIT(A) wrongly dismissed the appeal on technical grounds without considering the merits. The case was remanded back to the Assessing Officer to examine the issue afresh, allowing the assessee to present evidence for her exemption claim.
The Tribunal held that the delay in filing Form 10CCB was due to technical glitches and substantial compliance was made before filing the return. It further noted that Section 143(1)(a)(ii) does not permit disallowance for delayed filing of such a form as it's not an 'apparent incorrect claim'.
The Tribunal held that the jurisdiction of the Bench is determined by the location of the Assessing Officer who passed the assessment order. Therefore, the Guwahati Bench lacked jurisdiction to hear the appeal.