ITAT Indore Judgments — September 2017

The ITAT upheld the CIT(A)'s order regarding the cash shortage and bogus liabilities, finding the CIT(A)'s reasoning justified. The Tribunal dismissed the Revenue's appeal, thereby upholding the partial relief granted to the assessee.

The Tribunal held that Section 14A disallowance is applicable only when there is exempt income earned. Since the investment was strategically made to earn professional income and no exempt income was received, the disallowance of interest expenses was deleted.

The Tribunal held that penalty under Section 271(1)(c) cannot be levied when the issue is debatable and the assessee has made a full and true disclosure of facts. The mere reclassification of loss from business to speculative by the AO, without concealment or furnishing inaccurate particulars, does not warrant penalty.

The ITAT upheld the CIT(A)'s order regarding the cash shortage and bogus liabilities, finding the CIT(A)'s reasoning justified. The Tribunal dismissed the Revenue's appeal, thereby upholding the partial relief granted to the assessee.

The Tribunal held that the principle of 'audi alteram partem' (hear the other side) is a fundamental concept of natural justice. Since the assessee was not given a proper opportunity of hearing, the appeal was allowed.

The Tribunal held that the principle of 'audi alteram partem' (hear the other side) is a fundamental concept of natural justice. Since the assessee was not given a proper opportunity of hearing, the appeal was allowed.

The Tribunal held that the principle of 'audi alteram partem' (hear the other side) is a fundamental concept of natural justice. Since the assessee was not given a proper opportunity of hearing, the appeal was allowed.

The Tribunal held that the principle of 'audi alteram partem' (hear the other side) is a fundamental concept of natural justice. Since the assessee was not given a proper opportunity of hearing, the order of the CIT(A) was set aside.

The ITAT held that the principle of 'audi alteram partem' (hear the other side) is a fundamental concept of natural justice. The tribunal found that the assessee was not given a proper opportunity of being heard.

The Tribunal held that the principle of 'audi alteram partem' (hear the other side) is a fundamental concept of natural justice. The assessee was not given a proper opportunity of hearing.

The Tribunal held that the principle of 'audi alteram partem' (hear the other side) is a fundamental concept of natural justice. The assessee was not given a proper opportunity to be heard.

The Tribunal held that the principle of 'audi alteram partem' (hear the other side) was violated as the assessee was not given a proper opportunity to present their case. Therefore, the appeals were allowed to provide another opportunity.

The ITAT held that the principle of 'audi alteram partem' (hear the other side) is a fundamental concept of natural justice. The tribunal found that the assessee was not given a proper opportunity of being heard.

The Tribunal held that the principle of 'audi alteram partem' (hear the other side) was violated as the assessee was not given a proper opportunity to present their case. Therefore, the appeals were allowed to provide another opportunity.

The Tribunal held that the principle of 'audi alteram partem' (hear the other side) is a fundamental concept of natural justice. The assessee was not given a proper opportunity to be heard.

The tribunal held that the original assessment order under appeal had become infructuous due to the subsequent fresh assessment order. Therefore, the appeal was dismissed as infructuous.

The Tribunal held that the principles of natural justice, specifically the right to be heard, were violated by both the Assessing Officer and the CIT(A). Consequently, the appeal was restored to the Assessing Officer for de novo consideration.

The Tribunal held that the principles of natural justice, specifically the 'audi alteram partem' rule, were violated as the assessee was not given a proper opportunity to be heard. Therefore, the case was restored to the AO for fresh consideration.

The Tribunal held that the principle of 'audi alteram partem' (hear the other side) is a fundamental principle of natural justice. The assessee was not given a proper opportunity of being heard.

The Tribunal held that the principle of 'audi alteram partem' (hear the other side) is a fundamental concept of natural justice. The assessee was not given a proper opportunity of being heard.