ITAT Jaipur Judgments — May 2019

The Tribunal held that while the source of the entire deposit might not be fully explained, the deposits themselves could not be considered as income. At most, a net profit rate as prescribed under Section 44AD could be applied to the business deposits.

The Tribunal held that the CIT(A) was not justified in dismissing the appeals solely on the ground of not e-filing, especially when the appeals were manually filed and the assessment orders were passed prior to the e-filing rule amendment. The matter was restored to the CIT(A) for a decision on merits.

The Tribunal found that notices were not properly served on the assessee due to an incorrect address and poor postal services. The assessee was not provided with sufficient opportunity to present their case. Therefore, the matter was restored to the AO for fresh adjudication.

The Tribunal held that the CIT(A) was not justified in dismissing the appeals solely on the ground of not e-filing, especially when the appeals were manually filed and the assessment orders were passed prior to the e-filing rule amendment. The matter was restored to the CIT(A) for a decision on merits.

The Tribunal held that the electronic filing of Form 10CCB before the completion of assessment proceedings fulfilled the condition of Rule 12(2) of the IT Rules, especially as prior to the AY 2013-14, electronic filing was not mandatory. The AO was not justified in declining the deduction solely on this ground.