ITAT rejects Revenue's appeal on tax effect, cites Section 68; Assessee's appeal dismissed.

The Income Tax Appellate Tribunal (ITAT) rejected the Revenue's appeal due to the tax effect being below the prescribed amount. The case involved additions under Section 68 of the Income Tax Act based on information from the Enforcement Directorate. The Assessee, a non-resident, received remittances from a specific entity. Despite discrepancies in assessment proceedings and the earlier reassessment order, the Court found no significant legal issue and dismissed the appeal. Similar assessments for other individuals were remitted for reconsideration.

---

---

Issues:
1. Rejection of appeal by ITAT due to lower tax effect.
2. Addition under Section 68 of the Income Tax Act.
3. Information received from Enforcement Directorate regarding possible disallowance.
4. Assessee being a non-resident and remittances received from M/s. New heaven Nominees Limited.
5. Ignoring earlier reassessment order and discrepancies in assessment proceedings.

Analysis:
1. The Revenue's appeal was rejected by the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal (ITAT) citing the tax effect being lower than the stipulated amount in accordance with the prevailing Circular. Similar assessments involving Mr. Arvind Khanna and Mr. Navin Khanna were remitted for fresh consideration to the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals).

2. The Revenue contended that a sum of Rs. 33,51,269/- should be added under Section 68 of the Income Tax Act based on the facts and circumstances of the case.

3. The Revenue received information from the Enforcement Directorate regarding possible disallowance under Section 68, as per the notice issued under Section 148 of the Act.

4. The Assessee, represented by counsel, argued that they were a non-resident and the remittances were received from M/s. New heaven Nominees Limited.

5. The Assessing Officer (A.O.) seemed to have disregarded the earlier reassessment order framed under Section 148/143(3) on 31.12.2007. The A.O. appeared to have based the assessment on a chart without considering subsequent material, despite acknowledging the earlier reassessment proceedings. The Court found that no substantial question of law arose and subsequently dismissed the appeal.

---