ITAT Visakhapatnam Judgments — February 2021

The Tribunal held that the addition made by the AO based solely on the bank's debtor statement, without independent verification or corroborative evidence, was not sustainable. The Tribunal relied on various High Court decisions which held that inflated statements to banks for credit facilities do not automatically lead to additions if the books of accounts are otherwise in order.

The Tribunal noted that the Vivad Se Vishwas Act settlement certificate was issued and the assessee sought to withdraw the appeal. The appeal was dismissed as withdrawn.

The Tribunal found that proper clarification from the assessee and verification by the AO were crucial. Therefore, the order under challenge was set aside.

The Tribunal noted that the grounds of appeal were not pressed by the assessee's AR before the CIT(A). Therefore, the CIT(A) had dismissed the appeal. The Tribunal found no reason to contradict this and dismissed the assessee's appeal.

The Tribunal noted that the assessee had obtained a certificate under the Vivad Se Vishwas Act and had submitted a request to withdraw the appeal. The Tribunal dismissed the appeal as withdrawn.

The Tribunal allowed the assessees' appeals to be dismissed as withdrawn. This was based on the assessees having opted for the Vivad se Vishwas scheme and the Department not raising any objection.

The Tribunal allowed the assessees' appeals to be dismissed as withdrawn. This was based on the assessees having opted for the Vivad se Vishwas scheme and the Department not raising any objection.

The Tribunal allowed the assessees' appeals to be dismissed as withdrawn. This was based on the assessees having opted for the Vivad se Vishwas scheme and the Department not raising any objection.

The Tribunal allowed the assessees' appeals to be dismissed as withdrawn. This was granted with liberty to seek recall of the order if unforeseen circumstances arise.

The Tribunal allowed the assessees' appeals to be dismissed as withdrawn. This was based on the assessees having opted for the Vivad se Vishwas scheme and the Department not raising any objection.

The Tribunal noted that the issuance of Form No. 3 under the Vivad se Vishwas Act settles the tax dispute. Therefore, the departmental appeal becomes infructuous and is dismissed.

The ITAT acknowledged the assessee's lack of participation but, to uphold natural justice, decided to remand the case. The CIT(A) is directed to pass a speaking order on merits after providing a reasonable opportunity of hearing.

The Tribunal upheld the CIT(A)'s order, finding no reason to interfere. It agreed that once business income is estimated due to the unavailability of books of account, separate disallowance of interest on gold loan is not warranted.

The Tribunal held that the reassessment proceedings under Section 147 were initiated on the basis of suspicion rather than a 'reason to believe' supported by material evidence. The AO's reasons were vague, inconsistent regarding the bank involved, and lacked independent application of mind.

The Tribunal allowed the assessee's appeal to be dismissed as withdrawn. Consequently, the Revenue's appeal was also dismissed as infructuous.

The Tribunal allowed the assessee's appeal to be dismissed as withdrawn. Consequently, the Revenue's appeal was also dismissed as infructuous.

The Tribunal found that while the CIT(E) raised several points, there was insufficient evidence to conclusively reject the application. The Tribunal decided to remit the matter back to the CIT(E) for a fresh examination of the issues.

The Tribunal held that the AO had not made any additions in the impugned assessment order based on the audit objections. Therefore, the appeal by the Revenue was not maintainable as it was below the prescribed tax limit and not covered by exceptions.

The Tribunal noted that upon issuance of Form No.3, appeals are deemed withdrawn. The assessee requested to withdraw the appeals, which was permitted.

The Tribunal noted that the assessee had submitted Form No. 3 and requested to withdraw the appeal. The appeal was dismissed as withdrawn, with a rider that it could be recalled if the certificate was withdrawn in the future.

The Tribunal noted that the assessee had submitted an application under the Vivad Se Vishwas Act and was permitted to withdraw the appeal. The appeal was dismissed as withdrawn.

The Tribunal noted that upon issuance of Form No.3, the appeal is deemed withdrawn. Therefore, the appeal was dismissed as withdrawn.

The Tribunal noted that the Vivad Se Vishwas certificate was issued and the Revenue wished to withdraw the appeal. The appeal was dismissed as withdrawn, with a provision to recall the order if the certificate is withdrawn later.

The Tribunal noted that the assessee had submitted Form No. 3 and requested to withdraw the appeal. The appeal was dismissed as withdrawn.

The Tribunal noted that the assessee had obtained a certificate under the Vivad Se Vishwas Act and requested to withdraw the appeal. The Tribunal dismissed the appeal as withdrawn.

The tribunal noted that the assessee had availed the Vivad se Vishwas scheme and the department had issued the relevant form. Therefore, the assessee requested to withdraw the appeal.

The Tribunal noted that the assessee had obtained a certificate under the Vivad Se Vishwas Act and requested to withdraw the appeal. The Tribunal dismissed the appeal as withdrawn.

The Tribunal held that since the dispute was settled under the Vivad se Vishwas Scheme and accepted by the Principal Commissioner, the departmental appeal had become infructuous. The appeal was dismissed accordingly.

The Tribunal upheld the CIT(A)'s order, finding that the disallowance of 5% of labour charges was reasonable given the unverifiable nature of the expenditure and the assessee's inability to provide supporting evidence like PF/ESI payments or labour registers.

The Tribunal noted that the assessee had received a certificate under the Vivad Se Vishwas Act and had requested to withdraw the appeal. The appeal was dismissed as withdrawn.

The Tribunal noted that the assessee had filed Form No.3 under the Vivad se Vishwas Act, which leads to the withdrawal of the appeal. The appeal was dismissed as withdrawn.