ITAT Judgment contain Income Tax related Judgments from Income Tax Appellate Tribunal Across India which includes ITAT Mumbai, Chennai, Delhi, Kolkutta, Hyderabad etc.
Income Tax : The Tribunal held that reliance on third-party statements without granting effective cross-examination amounted to a violation of ...
Income Tax : Tribunal held that Section 87A rebate is linked to total income, which includes short-term capital gains. CPC's denial of rebate o...
Income Tax : The Tribunal ruled that once an assessee validly opts for the DCF method and submits a qualified valuation report, the Assessing O...
Income Tax : The Tribunal held that cash deposits during demonetisation cannot be treated as unexplained when backed by audited books, invoices...
Income Tax : The Tribunal ruled that non-specification of the precise statutory charge under sections 270A(2) and 270A(9) violated principles o...
Income Tax : The issue concerns massive backlog in ITAT caused by unfilled positions and delayed appointments. The intervention highlights that...
Income Tax : A representation seeks doubling the SMC threshold due to inflation and higher dispute values. The key takeaway is that increasing ...
Income Tax : The tribunal held that a gift deed alone cannot establish legitimacy under Section 68. It directed fresh scrutiny of the donor’s...
Income Tax : Delhi ITAT allows Sanco Holding, a Norwegian company, to compute income from bareboat charter of seismic vessels under Article 21(...
Income Tax : Learn about hybrid hearing guidelines of Income Tax Appellate Tribunal (ITAT) Indore Bench, effective from October 9, 2023, offeri...
Income Tax : ITAT Mumbai held that additions under Section 68 cannot be sustained merely on suspicion regarding penny stock transactions. The T...
Income Tax : ITAT Mumbai upheld the CIT(A)'s directions to verify fund flow, bank statements, and lenders' creditworthiness before making addit...
Income Tax : ITAT Chennai held that estimating income at 8% of turnover was excessive where the assessee's accounts were tax-audited and past p...
Income Tax : The Tribunal restored the matter to the Assessing Officer after finding that transfer pricing adjustments may have been added twic...
Income Tax : ITAT Chandigarh held that the assessee could not establish the authenticity of the purchase transactions underlying the LTCG claim...
Income Tax : The ITAT Delhi has revised its hearing notice protocols. Physical notices will now be sent only once, with subsequent dates availa...
Income Tax : ITAT Chandigarh held that ITO Ward-3(1), Chandigarh had no jurisdiction to issue notice to an NRI and hence consequently the asses...
Income Tax : Central Government is pleased to appoint Shri G. S. Pannu, Vice-President of the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, as President of th...
Income Tax : Ministry of Finance notified rules for appointment of members in various tribunals on 12.02.2020 in which practice of judicial and...
Income Tax : Bhagyalaxmi Conclave Pvt. Ltd. Vs DCIT (ITAT Kolkata) In the remand report, the AO clearly stated that notice u/s 143(2) of the Ac...
Chennai ITAT held that variations between Insight Portal data and GSTR-2A could not automatically establish unexplained expenditure under Section 69C. The Tribunal ruled that no addition could be sustained without evidence of actual unrecorded expenditure.
The Tribunal held that levy of penalty under Section 271(1)(c) was not justified in a case involving deemed rental income addition. It observed that the legal position on the issue was debatable during the relevant assessment year.
For deduction on carbon credits, Section 80-IA deduction on the sale of CERs must be allowed; gains from the prepayment of deferred sales tax constituted capital receipts, meaning Commissioner’s relief required no interference.
The Delhi ITAT held that lack of knowledge of the assessment order constituted sufficient cause for delayed filing before the CIT(A). The Tribunal restored the matter for fresh adjudication on merits after condoning the delay.
ITAT Mumbai held that where reassessment is based on documents seized during a search on another person, proceedings must be initiated under Section 153C and not Section 147.
The Tribunal accepted the assessee’s claim that the opening capital figure in the earlier ITR was wrongly reported due to omissions of FDRs and bank balances. Since the assets already existed in the preceding year, the addition under Section 68 was held unsustainable.
The Bangalore ITAT held that a genuine clerical mistake in Form 10 cannot deprive a charitable trust of exemption under Section 11(2) when the accumulation claim was properly disclosed elsewhere and corrected before assessment completion.
The Tribunal ruled that a Section 153C notice issued beyond the statutory ten-year period could not survive in law. The assessment order passed pursuant to such notice was therefore annulled as time-barred.
The Tribunal set aside the matter to the Assessing Officer for fresh adjudication of the co-operative housing society’s deduction claim under Section 80P(2)(d). The ruling emphasized that the claim required proper factual verification instead of outright rejection.
The Tribunal ruled that additions under Section 69A cannot survive where ledger accounts, bank statements, and lender confirmations establish genuine banking transactions. Mere suspicion arising from search information was held insufficient.
