Tribunal decisions on income assessment, property profit, cash deposits, and renovation costs

The Tribunal dismissed the appeal challenging the assessment based on a non-est return of income, citing procedural lapses under Sec. 292BB. Regarding the validity of a recorded statement under Sec. 131, the Tribunal remitted the issue for cross-examination opportunity. The case involving profit from a property transaction saw the CIT(A) partly allowing the appeal. Disputes over disallowances under Sec. 40A(3) and renovation costs were raised, with Tribunal decisions undisclosed. Additionally, the appellant contested the addition of unexplained cash deposits, with the CIT(A) partly allowing the appeal, and the Tribunal's decision undisclosed.

---

---

Issues:
1. Assessment based on non-est return of income
2. Validity of statement recorded u/s.131
3. Addition of profit from property transaction
4. Disallowance u/s.40A(3)
5. Disallowance of cost of renovation
6. Addition of cash deposits in bank

Assessment based on non-est return of income:
The appeal challenges the assessment based on a return filed on 31.03.2014, deemed a non-est return. The argument is that a return revised due to an inquiry does not fall under Sec. 139(5) of the Act. Citing case laws, the appellant seeks to quash the assessment. The Department contends the appellant participated in assessment without protest. The Tribunal dismisses the appeal, citing Sec. 292BB to address procedural lapses.

Validity of statement recorded u/s.131:
The appellant raises the issue of denial of cross-examination of a key witness, Shri Stephen John, during assessment. Alleging a violation of natural justice, the appellant seeks an opportunity for cross-examination. The Tribunal acknowledges the importance of cross-examination when third-party evidence is used. It remits the issue to the CIT(A) for providing the appellant with the opportunity for cross-examination.

Addition of profit from property transaction:
The case involves a property sale where the appellant received funds but claimed they were on behalf of the actual owner. However, the AO found discrepancies, leading to an addition in taxable income. The CIT(A) partly allowed the appeal. The appellant challenges the assessment, emphasizing the source of the funds. The Tribunal's decision is not provided in this summary.

Disallowance u/s.40A(3):
The appellant contests the disallowance under Sec.40A(3) related to cash payments exceeding Rs. 20,000. Disputes arise over the nature of payments and their treatment as expenditures. The Tribunal's decision is not provided in this summary.

Disallowance of cost of renovation:
The appellant disputes the disallowance of renovation costs, arguing against the CIT(A)'s decision. Differences between renovation and repair costs are highlighted. The Tribunal's decision is not provided in this summary.

Addition of cash deposits in bank:
The AO added Rs. 95 lakhs as unexplained cash deposits in the bank, leading to an increased taxable income. The appellant's explanations were deemed unsatisfactory. The CIT(A) partly allowed the appeal. The appellant challenges the addition, presenting explanations for the deposits. The Tribunal's decision is not provided in this summary.

This comprehensive analysis covers the issues raised in the legal judgment, providing detailed insights into each aspect of the case and the arguments presented by the appellant.

---