ITAT Nagpur Judgments — April 2022

The Tribunal upheld the CIT(Appeals)'s decision, finding no infirmity in allowing the deduction. It was held that the reassessment was based on a change of opinion and the notice was barred by limitation, as the issue had attained finality in earlier years.

The Tribunal upheld the CIT(Appeals)'s decision, finding no infirmity in allowing the deduction. It was held that the reassessment was based on a change of opinion and the notice was barred by limitation, as the issue had attained finality in earlier years.

The Tribunal held that the Pr. CIT could not substitute his view for that of the Assessing Officer, especially when the AO had conducted detailed deliberations and accepted the assessee's explanation. The retraction of the statement by the witness was considered significant.

The Tribunal held that the relationship between the donor and assessee was not doubted, and the Revenue failed to provide any contrary evidence. Therefore, the addition made by the AO and confirmed by the CIT(A) was not sustainable.

The Tribunal held that the assessment under Section 153A was without jurisdiction because no incriminating material was found during the search. Therefore, it was not necessary to go into the merits of the deduction claim, as it would be academic.

The Tribunal noted that the same issue regarding the addition of Rs. 10,43,150/- was dealt with in a regular assessment appeal, where the addition was deleted on merits. Therefore, the present appeal against the Section 154 order was rendered infructuous.

The Tribunal held that the nomenclature of the loan as 'business loan' in the certificates does not affect the allowability of interest under Section 24(b) if the borrowed capital was used for acquiring property. The Tribunal found that the loan was indeed for housing purposes and allowed the deduction.

The Tribunal held that the notice u/s.143(2) was issued beyond the prescribed time limit, rendering the assessment u/s.153-A invalid for AY 2004-05. It also found that the addition of Rs.17,66,000/- for AY 2009-10 was unjustified as the sale deed date fell in AY 2008-09 and the seized paper did not prove actual payment beyond the registered sale deed.

The tribunal held that notice under section 143(2) is not mandatory in search assessment proceedings under section 153A. However, the addition of Rs. 12,00,000 was deleted as the diary entry was an estimation and there was no evidence of actual payment.

The Tribunal held that the addition of Rs. 10,43,150/- retained by the CIT(A) was contradictory to his own findings and deleted it. The Tribunal also allowed the additional ground regarding unexplained cash.

The Tribunal held that the AO had conducted due inquiry and considered the material on record before allowing the deduction. The PCIT's revisionary order was found unsustainable as it was based on a different opinion and lacked proper opportunity for the assessee.

The Tribunal held that the PCIT's revisionary order was unsustainable in law. It found that the AO had conducted due inquiry and considered the material before allowing the deduction under Section 80P, and the PCIT could not arrive at a different conclusion based on the same material.

The Tribunal acknowledged that the COVID-19 pandemic made it difficult for the assessee to comply with the CIT's directions. Therefore, the appeal was restored to the file of the CIT for a fresh hearing, with a direction to the assessee to submit the required information.

The Tribunal held that late filing fees under Section 234E cannot be levied for TDS statements filed before June 1, 2015. The Tribunal also noted that the time limit for issuing an intimation under Section 200A had expired.

The Tribunal held that the reassessment orders passed under Section 153A were barred by limitation as they were not completed within the prescribed timeframe under Section 153B. Consequently, the assessment orders were cancelled.

The Tribunal held that the Assessing Officer (AO) had conducted due inquiry and considered the material on record before allowing the deduction. The PCIT's action was based on a change of opinion, which is impermissible under Section 263 when the AO has applied his mind to the facts.

The Tribunal held that the notice u/s.143(2) was issued beyond the prescribed time limit, rendering the assessment u/s.153-A invalid for AY 2004-05. It also found that the addition of Rs.17,66,000/- for AY 2009-10 was unjustified as the sale deed date fell in AY 2008-09 and the seized paper did not prove actual payment beyond the registered sale deed.

The Tribunal held that the AO had made due inquiries and taken a plausible view based on submitted documents and judicial precedents. The PCIT's revisionary order, based solely on an audit objection and without independent application of mind, was unsustainable.

The Tribunal held that the nature of the transaction was trading, considering the short holding period, sale to a builder for non-agricultural use, and the commercial development of the surrounding area. The intention was to resell the land for profit rather than for cultivation.

The Tribunal held that for assessment years prior to 2021-22, if employee contributions to PF and ESI are deposited before the due date of filing the return of income under Section 139(1), the deduction cannot be disallowed under Section 43B or Section 36(1)(va). The amendments introduced by the Finance Act, 2021, are prospective.

The Tribunal held that the amendment to Section 200A, which enabled the levy of late filing fees, was prospective from June 1, 2015. Therefore, for defaults prior to this date, the Assessing Officer lacked jurisdiction to charge such fees.

The Tribunal held that for assessment years prior to 2021-22, if employee contributions to PF and ESI are deposited before the due date of filing the return of income under Section 139(1), the deduction cannot be disallowed under Section 43B or Section 36(1)(va). The amendments introduced by the Finance Act, 2021, are prospective.

The Tribunal held that for assessment years prior to 2021-22, if employee contributions to PF and ESI are deposited before the due date of filing the return of income under Section 139(1), the deduction cannot be disallowed under Section 43B or Section 36(1)(va). The amendments introduced by the Finance Act, 2021, are prospective.

The Tribunal held that for assessment years prior to 2021-22, if employee contributions to PF and ESI are deposited before the due date of filing the return of income under Section 139(1), the deduction cannot be disallowed under Section 43B or Section 36(1)(va). The amendments introduced by the Finance Act, 2021, are prospective.

The Tribunal held that for assessment years prior to 2021-22, if employee contributions to PF and ESI are deposited before the due date of filing the return of income under Section 139(1), the deduction cannot be disallowed under Section 43B or Section 36(1)(va). The amendments introduced by the Finance Act, 2021, are prospective.

The Tribunal held that for assessment years prior to 2021-22, if employee contributions to PF and ESI are deposited before the due date of filing the return of income under Section 139(1), the deduction cannot be disallowed under Section 43B or Section 36(1)(va). The amendments introduced by the Finance Act, 2021, are prospective.

The Tribunal held that for assessment years prior to 2021-22, if employee contributions to PF and ESI are deposited before the due date of filing the return of income under Section 139(1), the deduction cannot be disallowed under Section 43B or Section 36(1)(va). The amendments introduced by the Finance Act, 2021, are prospective.

The Tribunal held that for assessment years prior to 2021-22, if employee contributions to PF and ESI are deposited before the due date of filing the return of income under Section 139(1), the deduction cannot be disallowed under Section 43B or Section 36(1)(va). The amendments introduced by the Finance Act, 2021, are prospective.

The Tribunal held that for assessment years prior to 2021-22, if employee contributions to PF and ESI are deposited before the due date of filing the return of income under Section 139(1), the deduction cannot be disallowed under Section 43B or Section 36(1)(va). The amendments introduced by the Finance Act, 2021, are prospective.

The Tribunal held that for assessment years prior to 2021-22, if employee contributions to PF and ESI are deposited before the due date of filing the return of income under Section 139(1), the deduction cannot be disallowed under Section 43B or Section 36(1)(va). The amendments introduced by the Finance Act, 2021, are prospective.

The Tribunal held that for assessment years prior to 2021-22, if employee contributions to PF and ESI are deposited before the due date of filing the return of income under Section 139(1), the deduction cannot be disallowed under Section 43B or Section 36(1)(va). The amendments introduced by the Finance Act, 2021, are prospective.

The Tribunal held that for assessment years prior to 2021-22, if employee contributions to PF and ESI are deposited before the due date of filing the return of income under Section 139(1), the deduction cannot be disallowed under Section 43B or Section 36(1)(va). The amendments introduced by the Finance Act, 2021, are prospective.

The Tribunal held that for assessment years prior to 2021-22, if employee contributions to PF and ESI are deposited before the due date of filing the return of income under Section 139(1), the deduction cannot be disallowed under Section 43B or Section 36(1)(va). The amendments introduced by the Finance Act, 2021, are prospective.

The Tribunal held that for assessment years prior to 2021-22, if employee contributions to PF and ESI are deposited before the due date of filing the return of income under Section 139(1), the deduction cannot be disallowed under Section 43B or Section 36(1)(va). The amendments introduced by the Finance Act, 2021, are prospective.

The Tribunal held that for assessment years prior to 2021-22, if employee contributions to PF and ESI are deposited before the due date of filing the return of income under Section 139(1), the deduction cannot be disallowed under Section 43B or Section 36(1)(va). The amendments introduced by the Finance Act, 2021, are prospective.

The Tribunal held that for assessment years prior to 2021-22, if employee contributions to PF and ESI are deposited before the due date of filing the return of income under Section 139(1), the deduction cannot be disallowed under Section 43B or Section 36(1)(va). The amendments introduced by the Finance Act, 2021, are prospective.

The Tribunal held that for assessment years prior to 2021-22, if employee contributions to PF and ESI are deposited before the due date of filing the return of income under Section 139(1), the deduction cannot be disallowed under Section 43B or Section 36(1)(va). The amendments introduced by the Finance Act, 2021, are prospective.

The Tribunal held that for assessment years prior to 2021-22, if employee contributions to PF and ESI are deposited before the due date of filing the return of income under Section 139(1), the deduction cannot be disallowed under Section 43B or Section 36(1)(va). The amendments introduced by the Finance Act, 2021, are prospective.

The Tribunal held that for assessment years prior to 2021-22, if employee contributions to PF and ESI are deposited before the due date of filing the return of income under Section 139(1), the deduction cannot be disallowed under Section 43B or Section 36(1)(va). The amendments introduced by the Finance Act, 2021, are prospective.

The Tribunal held that for assessment years prior to 2021-22, if employee contributions to PF and ESI are deposited before the due date of filing the return of income under Section 139(1), the deduction cannot be disallowed under Section 43B or Section 36(1)(va). The amendments introduced by the Finance Act, 2021, are prospective.

The Tribunal held that for assessment years prior to 2021-22, if employee contributions to PF and ESI are deposited before the due date of filing the return of income under Section 139(1), the deduction cannot be disallowed under Section 43B or Section 36(1)(va). The amendments introduced by the Finance Act, 2021, are prospective.

The Tribunal held that for assessment years prior to 2021-22, if employee contributions to PF and ESI are deposited before the due date of filing the return of income under Section 139(1), the deduction cannot be disallowed under Section 43B or Section 36(1)(va). The amendments introduced by the Finance Act, 2021, are prospective.

The Tribunal held that for assessment years prior to 2021-22, if employee contributions to PF and ESI are deposited before the due date of filing the return of income under Section 139(1), the deduction cannot be disallowed under Section 43B or Section 36(1)(va). The amendments introduced by the Finance Act, 2021, are prospective.

The Tribunal held that for assessment years prior to 2021-22, if employee contributions to PF and ESI are deposited before the due date of filing the return of income under Section 139(1), the deduction cannot be disallowed under Section 43B or Section 36(1)(va). The amendments introduced by the Finance Act, 2021, are prospective.

The Tribunal held that for assessment years prior to 2021-22, if employee contributions to PF and ESI are deposited before the due date of filing the return of income under Section 139(1), the deduction cannot be disallowed under Section 43B or Section 36(1)(va). The amendments introduced by the Finance Act, 2021, are prospective.

The Tribunal held that for assessment years prior to 2021-22, if employee contributions to PF and ESI are deposited before the due date of filing the return of income under Section 139(1), the deduction cannot be disallowed under Section 43B or Section 36(1)(va). The amendments introduced by the Finance Act, 2021, are prospective.

The Tribunal held that for assessment years prior to 2021-22, if employee contributions to PF and ESI are deposited before the due date of filing the return of income under Section 139(1), the deduction cannot be disallowed under Section 43B or Section 36(1)(va). The amendments introduced by the Finance Act, 2021, are prospective.

The Tribunal held that for assessment years prior to 2021-22, if employee contributions to PF and ESI are deposited before the due date of filing the return of income under Section 139(1), the deduction cannot be disallowed under Section 43B or Section 36(1)(va). The amendments introduced by the Finance Act, 2021, are prospective.

The Tribunal held that for assessment years prior to 2021-22, if employee contributions to PF and ESI are deposited before the due date of filing the return of income under Section 139(1), the deduction cannot be disallowed under Section 43B or Section 36(1)(va). The amendments introduced by the Finance Act, 2021, are prospective.