Opportunity to furnish unsecured-loan confirmations is required before reassessment initiation; proceedings require fresh consideration after taxpayer...
Under-reporting on a first reassessment return attracts penalty, while enhanced misreporting penalty requires proof of a statutory misreporting catego...
ITAT upheld the CIT(A)'s deletion of additions, holding that the satisfaction note did not identify any incriminating material seized that disclosed undisclosed income under s.153C; the transaction (sale consideration of Rs.10.43 crore) was already declared in the assesee's returns for AY 2012-13 and AY 2014-15 and assessed. The Tribunal found seized documents (including ikrarnamas and registered deed) related to the same disclosed transaction and were not shown to generate new incriminating information; revenue failed to demonstrate that seized material disclosed undisclosed income. Consequently, jurisdictional prerequisites for invoking s.153A read with s.153C were not satisfied, and the CIT(A) order deleting the addition was affirmed.
ITAT upheld the CIT(A)'s deletion of additions, holding that the satisfaction note did not identify any incriminating material seized that disclosed undisclosed income under s.153C; the transaction (sale consideration of Rs.10.43 crore) was already declared in the assesee's returns for AY 2012-13 and AY 2014-15 and assessed. The Tribunal found seized documents (including ikrarnamas and registered deed) related to the same disclosed transaction and were not shown to generate new incriminating information; revenue failed to demonstrate that seized material disclosed undisclosed income. Consequently, jurisdictional prerequisites for invoking s.153A read with s.153C were not satisfied, and the CIT(A) order deleting the addition was affirmed.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.