https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=770435 The ITAT Ahmedabad allowed appeals filed by the assessee against penalty under section 271(1)(c) and additions under section 69 for unexplained investment. The case involved recharacterization of land transactions as business activity versus the assessee's claim that these were rural agricultural land held as capital assets. The CIT(A) had dismissed appeals ex parte without proper examination of documentary evidence. The ITAT restored all four appeals (two quantum and two penalty) to the AO for de novo adjudication, directing fresh consideration of the nature and source of land transactions, exemption claims, and penalty issues after providing adequate opportunity to the assessee. en-us Thu, 08 May 2025 00:00:00 +0530 Sat, 10 May 2025 08:36:35 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=770435 The ITAT Ahmedabad allowed appeals filed by the assessee against penalty under section 271(1)(c) and additions under section 69 for unexplained investment. The case involved recharacterization of land transactions as business activity versus the assessee's claim that these were rural agricultural land held as capital assets. The CIT(A) had dismissed appeals ex parte without proper examination of documentary evidence. The ITAT restored all four appeals (two quantum and two penalty) to the AO for de novo adjudication, directing fresh consideration of the nature and source of land transactions, exemption claims, and penalty issues after providing adequate opportunity to the assessee. Case-Laws Income Tax Thu, 08 May 2025 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=770435