HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE DIPANKAR DATTA HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE PRASANNA B. VARALE

SHRI ANADEE NATH MISSHRA (Accountant Member)

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.

SHRI YOGESH KUMAR U.S. (Judicial Member), SHRI MANISH AGARWAL (Accountant Member)

The Tribunal held that since the AO had accepted the declared income, including INR 60 Lakhs cash receipts from the profession, this amount could not be subsequently treated as unexplained cash credit under Section 68 by the CIT(A). The enhancement by CIT(A) without a show cause notice was impermissible, and treating already declared income as unexplained credit would result in a double addition.

SHRI YOGESH KUMAR U.S. (Judicial Member), SHRI MANISH AGARWAL, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER | ITA No. 45/DDN/2026 | | |-------------------------------------|-------------| | [Assessment Year : 2013-14] | | | Abhishek Banta | vs | ITAT, Dehradun Bench, | 1, Near Hotel Rama Krishna, Haridwar Railway Road, Haridwar, Uttarakhand -249401. | | Income Tax Uttarakhand | PAN-AINPB7304D | | | APPELLANT | RESPONDENT | | Appellant by | Ms. Mrinali Sharma, CA | | Respondent by | Ms. Poonam Sharma, CIT

The Tribunal, in the interest of justice, granted the assessee another opportunity to present their case. The matter was restored to the file of the Assessing Officer for a de-novo assessment, with directions for the assessee to participate in the remand proceedings and furnish evidence regarding the cash deposits. The appeal was allowed for statistical purposes.

SHRI YOGESH KUMAR U.S. (Judicial Member), SHRI MANISH AGARWAL (Accountant Member)

The Tribunal held that the AO had accepted the income declared in the return, including the cash receipts, and thus, the same gross receipts could not be treated as unexplained cash credit u/s 68. The enhancement by the CIT(A) without a show cause notice was also deemed impermissible.

SHRI YOGESH KUMAR U.S. (Judicial Member), SHRI MANISH AGARWAL (Accountant Member)

The Tribunal held that the assessee was able to explain the source of cash deposits from prior withdrawals and past savings. The accumulation of cash was also evident in the capital account.

SHRI YOGESH KUMAR U.S. (Judicial Member), SHRI MANISH AGARWAL (Accountant Member)

The Tribunal found that the addition made by the AO under Section 50C of the Act was justified as no satisfactory explanation was provided by the assessee regarding the difference in property valuation. The order of the Ld. CIT(A) was upheld.

SHRI SATBEER SINGH GODARA (Judicial Member), SHRI S. RIFAUR RAHMAN (Accountant Member)

The Tribunal held that the contract was for the supply of equipment manufactured outside India, not for services. The duration of the contract alone is not sufficient to establish a PE in India. Therefore, the receipts are not taxable in India.

SHRI PARTHA SARATHI CHAUDHURY (Judicial Member)

The Tribunal held that the assessee's delay in filing appeals and rectification petitions was due to gross negligence and lack of bonafide reasons. The Tribunal dismissed the appeals, upholding the orders of the CIT(Appeals)/NFAC.

SHRI PARTHA SARATHI CHAUDHURY (Judicial Member)

The Tribunal held that the assessee's inordinate delays in filing appeals and rectification petitions, without bonafide reasons or sufficient cause, demonstrated negligence. Consequently, the appeals were dismissed on the grounds of delay and limitation.