Delhi ITAT restored a ₹1.18 crore PF/ESI disallowance issue to the Assessing Officer to examine whether the statutory due date should be determined with reference to the month in which salary was actually disbursed.
Pune ITAT set aside a 7.5% estimated-profit addition after finding that the assessee had not received an effective opportunity to present the case, and restored the matter for fresh adjudication.
Chandigarh ITAT deleted a ₹1.02 crore sustained gross-profit addition because the audited books were rejected without identifying any specific defect and the higher GP rates were based on suspicion.
Patna High Court held that Section 64(1)(iii), effective from 1 April 1976, could not retrospectively club a minor’s partnership income that accrued during the earlier accounting year.
The Lucknow ITAT held that cash deposited by customers through a Bank Mitra could not be treated as the Bank Mitra’s unexplained money. It deleted the ₹1.31 crore addition, removed a small rental-income addition and partly reduced the penalty.
In Valnaickenpalayam Rangasamy Palanivelu v. ITO, Chennai ITAT held that AIR information and a comparison with returned income could not replace independent verification of disclosed business turnover.
Once registered sale deeds established the source of ₹76.45 lakh cash deposits, Chennai ITAT held that Revenue could not sustain a Section 69 addition merely by doubting how the cash was used or retained in the intervening period.
Chennai ITAT upheld deletion of a ₹7.84 lakh interest disallowance after finding that the assessee had sufficient interest-free own funds to cover ₹86 lakh of advances.