ITAT Jabalpur Judgments — November 2020

DALPAT DALJIT SINGH,SHAHDOL vs ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, KATNI

ITA 60/JAB/2018[2014-15]Status: Disposed25 Nov 2020AY 2014-15Dismissed

The Principal Commissioner of Income Tax accepted the assessee's declaration under the Vivad Se Vishwas Scheme and issued Form-3. Consequently, the assessee sought to withdraw the appeal.

SHRI VINAY PRAKASH vs INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD- 1(2), JABALPUR

ITA 83/JAB/2016[2011-12]Status: Disposed24 Nov 2020AY 2011-12Dismissed

The Tribunal granted the assessee's request to withdraw the appeal. The learned DR had no objection to the dismissal of the appeal as withdrawn.

RAJKUMAR MANGHNANI,SATNA vs INCOME TAX OFFICER WARD-1, SATNA

ITA 12/JAB/2020[2015-16]Status: Disposed23 Nov 2020AY 2015-16Withdrawn

The Tribunal accepted the assessee's prayer to withdraw the appeal. The appeal was dismissed as withdrawn due to the assessee opting for the Vivad Se Vishwas Scheme.

SHRI RAJESH KUMAR MANCHHANI,JABALPUR vs INCOME TAX OFFICER WARD 1(1), JABALPUR

ITA 172/JAB/2018[2010-11]Status: Disposed18 Nov 2020AY 2010-11Allowed

The Tribunal held that if assessment proceedings are pending on the date of receipt of search material, they abate, and a consolidated order under Section 153C should be passed. Since the AO could not produce the search material and the assessment proceedings were pending, the order passed under Section 143(3) was deemed invalid.

SHRI SHANKARLAL VISHWKARMA,KATNI vs ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CPC- TDS, GHAZIABAB

ITA 90/JAB/2019[2015-16]Status: Disposed18 Nov 2020AY 2015-16Dismissed

The Tribunal held that the AO had the power to levy the fee for delay in filing the TDS return under Section 200A(c), as amended by the Finance Act, 2015. Since the TDS return was filed belatedly, the assessee was liable to pay the fee.

SHRI VINOD KUMAR GURU,JABALPUR vs INCOME TAX OFFICER WARD 2(1), JABALPUR

ITA 38/JAB/2019[2012-13]Status: Disposed17 Nov 2020AY 2012-13Allowed

The Tribunal held that there cannot be two different fair market values for the same property as of 01.04.1981. Consistency in valuation is important, and since the brother's declared value was accepted, the assessee's value should also not be disturbed.

KALPATRU AGENCIES vs ADDITONAL COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX RANGE-1,

ITA 121/JAB/2014[2008-09]Status: Disposed12 Nov 2020AY 2008-09Allowed

The Tribunal held that profit cannot be estimated if the books of account are not rejected. Since the AO accepted the books and no defects were found, the CIT(A) was not justified in rejecting the book results and making an addition.

SHRI SHANKARLAL VISHWKARMA,KATNI vs ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CPC- TDS, GHAZIABAB

ITA 89/JAB/2019[2014-15]Status: Disposed11 Nov 2020AY 2014-15Allowed

The Tribunal held that Section 200A did not enable the Assessing Officer to levy fee under Section 234E before June 1, 2015. The amendment to Section 200A, effective from June 1, 2015, was necessary to allow such a levy during the processing of TDS statements.

POORAN LAL VISHWAKARMA,KATNI vs ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CPC-TDS, GHAZIABAD

ITA 87/JAB/2019[2014-15]Status: Disposed11 Nov 2020AY 2014-15Allowed

The Tribunal held that Section 200A did not enable the Assessing Officer to levy fee under Section 234E before June 1, 2015. The amendment to Section 200A, effective from June 1, 2015, was necessary to allow such a levy during the processing of TDS statements.

SHRI SHANKARLAL VISHWKARMA,KATNI vs ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CPC- TDS, GHAZIABAB

ITA 88/JAB/2019[2013-14]Status: Disposed11 Nov 2020AY 2013-14Allowed

The Tribunal held that Section 200A did not enable the Assessing Officer to levy fee under Section 234E before June 1, 2015. The amendment to Section 200A, effective from June 1, 2015, was necessary to allow such a levy during the processing of TDS statements.