ITAT Jabalpur Judgments — March 2026
13 orders · Page 1 of 1
The ITAT set aside the CIT(A)'s order and restored the issue to the Assessing Officer for a de novo assessment. This was due to the assessee not being given a reasonable opportunity to be heard by the lower authorities.
The Tribunal held that the delay in filing the appeal before the CIT(A) was due to sufficient cause, and the CIT(A) erred in not condoning it. On merits, the Tribunal found that the addition was not clearly explained and lacked proper reasoning, thus restoring the issue to the AO for fresh reference to the DVO and a de novo assessment.
The ITAT held that the disallowance of expenses claimed under Section 11 was a debatable issue and could not be made as a prima facie adjustment under Section 143(1). The tribunal noted that similar issues were decided in favor of the assessee in previous years by other ITAT benches.
The ITAT condoned the delay in filing appeals. It directed the AO to recompute the assessee's income by applying a net profit rate of 12% on the turnover of Rs. 10,67,337, as agreed by both parties. The penalty issue under Section 271(1)(c) was also restored to the AO for reconsideration based on the revised income.
The ITAT set aside the CIT(A)'s orders and remanded all disputed issues back to the Assessing Officer for a de novo assessment. This decision was based on the need for further factual verification, especially regarding the assessee's claim of income exemption and the applicability of disallowance sections.
The Tribunal set aside the CIT(A)'s order and restored the issues to the Assessing Officer for a de novo assessment. This was due to the assessee not receiving a reasonable opportunity during the previous proceedings, with directions to provide such opportunity.
The Tribunal set aside the CIT(A)'s order and remanded the case back to the Assessing Officer for a de novo assessment. The Assessing Officer was directed to provide a reasonable opportunity to the assessee before passing a fresh order.
The ITAT set aside the Ld. CIT(A)'s order and restored the issues back to the Assessing Officer. The AO was directed to pass a de novo assessment order after providing the assessee with a reasonable opportunity, as the original addition was based on a report from irrelevant financial years.
The ITAT condoned the delay in filing appeals. It directed the AO to recompute the assessee's income by applying a net profit rate of 12% on the turnover of Rs. 10,67,337. The penalty issue under Section 271(1)(c) was restored to the AO to be decided based on the recomputed income.
The ITAT set aside the CIT(A)'s order and restored the matter to the Assessing Officer for a de novo assessment. This was due to the assessment and appellate orders being passed ex parte without providing reasonable opportunity to the assessee.
The ITAT condoned the delay in filing appeals. For the quantum appeal, it directed the Assessing Officer to recompute income by applying a 12% net profit rate on the Rs. 10,67,337 turnover, as agreed by both parties. The penalty issue was restored to the AO to be decided based on the recomputed income. Two other appeals were dismissed as withdrawn.
The ITAT set aside the CIT(A)'s orders and remanded both appeals back to the Assessing Officer. The tribunal directed the AO to pass de novo orders after proper factual verification and providing the assessee a reasonable opportunity to be heard, as the issues required further examination.
The ITAT condoned the delay in filing appeals. It directed the AO to recompute the assessee's income by applying a net profit rate of 12% on the turnover of Rs. 10,67,337. The penalty issue under Section 271(1)(c) was also restored to the AO to be decided based on the recomputed income.
