-
The assessee requested to the Ld. AO to furnish the statement recorded u/s. 132(4) of the Act which was not provided and the assessee retracted the statement through an affidavit confirming that the search officers recorded contrary to the answer given by them and such statements are not voluntarily and not the reliable evidence as signed under pressure. Further there is no independent and cogent evidence to corroborate the statement.The moot question in these circumstances that whether these statements are voluntarily and can be considered as reliable evidence. ITAT Pune decided on 24 June, 2021 in the case DCIT vs Shikshana Prasaraka Mandali. Kindly click the link to get full order. FCA bpmundra 9314501680 [email protected].
-
An assessee has not filed the appeal. Now while filing cross objection on appeal filed by the department, the assessee submit an application in Rule 27 of the Appellate Tribunal Rules raising a new ground on which neither any decision rendered by the CIT(A) nor such ground was raised in appeal to CIT(A). The moot question is can the assessee file an application? ITAT Pune decided on 24 June, 2021 in the case DCIT vs Shikshana Prasaraka Mandali. Best Course of action is to file appeal and if there is delay in appeal then file with an application of condonation of delay. Kindly click the link to get full order. FCA bpmundra 9314501680 [email protected].
-
Section 148-ITAT, PUNE BENCH-11 September, 2019 held that Reassessment—Validity—only on the basis of the some reasons to believe about the escapement of income. Existence of reasons for escapement of income are sine qua non to embark upon the assessment or reassessment under section 147 of the Act. Kailash Kanhaiyalal Gidwani v. ACIT. AY 2009-10
-
section 56(2)(vii)(b) is not applicable on purchase of goods for sale. Section 56(2)(vii)(b) covers transactions value is less than than Rs. 50000 or more with Fair Market Value. These transactions occurs on or after first day of October, 2009 but before first day of April, 2017
-
No incriminating material was found during search that would have resulted in any addition in income returned by assessee. It was also an uncontroverted fact that assessment consequent to return of income filed u/s 139 for AY 2006-07 was completed. Thus, on date of search, no assessment was pending which could have abated. It was a case of non-abated assessment. No addition could be made in respect of assessments which became final if no incriminating material was found during search. CIT Vs. Murli Agro Products Ltd
-
If any information belonging to an assessee found during course of search at another party and Ld AO initiated proceedings u/s 147/148 then the re-assessment proceedings passed u/s 148 shall not stand and assessment framed by AO is null and void as the correct course of initiation of proceedings is 153C and not u/s 147/148