ITAT Ranchi Judgments — July 2023

The Tribunal held that the PCIT failed to demonstrate how the AO's order was erroneous and prejudicial to the revenue, especially since the issue raised was outside the scope of limited scrutiny. The revisionary jurisdiction was not validly exercised.

The Tribunal held that since no incriminating material was found during the search and the assessment was unabated on the date of search, the Assessing Officer could not make additions on other issues. Therefore, the PCIT wrongly exercised revision jurisdiction.

The Tribunal upheld the CIT(A)'s order, finding no infirmity. The CIT(A) had correctly noted that the assessee applied a substantial portion of its income to charitable activities and that the fees charged were not excessive, thus not indicating a profit motive.

The Tribunal held that unabsorbed depreciation can be carried forward and set off without limit as per Section 32(2) amended by the Finance Act, 2001, following a Gujarat High Court decision. The assessee's appeal was dismissed as it had withdrawn its grounds before the lower appellate authority.

The Tribunal held that unabsorbed depreciation can be carried forward and set off without limit as per Section 32(2) amended by the Finance Act, 2001, following judicial precedents. The assessee's appeal was dismissed as it had withdrawn its grounds before the lower appellate authority.

The Tribunal upheld the AO's segregation of consultancy, commodity trading, and cutting charges as 'other income' but directed that expenses incurred to earn this income should be set off. For the remaining business income, the profit estimation was reduced from 8% to 5%.

The Tribunal held that the assessee's case falls within the exception provided by the provisos to Section 56(2)(vii)(b) as a significant portion of the consideration was paid by cheque after the agreement date and before the sale deed registration.