The ITAT Lucknow quashed the ex-parte appellate orders for AY 2013-14, 2015-16, and 2016-17, ruling that the CIT(A) failed in its statutory duty to pass a speaking order on the appeal merits. The case is remitted for a de novo assessment.
Effective November 1, 2025, CBIC’s Fourth Amendment Rules introduce automated GST registration (Rule 9A) within three days using risk-based data analysis. Rule 14A offers a simplified, optional registration path for small taxpayers with monthly liability below Rs.2.5 lakh.
ITAT Mumbai held that a penalty under Section 271(1)(c) was premature when the related quantum appeal was still pending, remitting the matter back for fresh consideration.
The Appellate Tribunal held that an attempted foreign exchange transaction is not a contravention under FEMA Section 3(d), as the Act requires an actual financial transaction. The Tribunal dismissed the Enforcement Directorate’s plea for confiscation of ₹89.70 lakh and ordered the refund of the balance after adjusting the penalties.
PPT provisions inapplicable in absence of separate notification incorporating MLI provisions into India-Ireland tax treaty Background The Mumbai ITAT in Sky High Appeal XLIII Leasing Company Limited v. ACIT (2025) 177 taxmann.com 579 (Mum)/ TS-1085–ITAT-2025(Mum) and the Delhi ITAT in Kosi Aviation Leasing Ltd. v. ACIT [ITA No. 994/Del/2025, dated 30-9-2025] have held that operating […]
Supreme Court rulings in Wipro and Shriram Investments mandate strict adherence to return filing deadlines: fresh claims/withdrawals of exemptions (like Sec 10B) via revised returns filed after the original due date are invalid. Appellate authorities retain power to admit new claims.
ITAT Mumbai ruled that gains from rights entitlement transfers are exempt under Article 13(6) of the India-Ireland DTAA because they are distinct from shares, not covered by Article 13(5). The Tribunal also affirmed that short-term capital losses from STT-paid shares can be set off against short-term capital gains from non-STT-paid shares.
ITAT Mumbai quashed a Rs.10 lakh penalty under Black Money Act, ruling that DDIT(Inv.) lacked necessary pecuniary jurisdiction to impose penalties exceeding ₹5 lakh. Decision strictly enforces CBDT guidelines, which reserve penalty proceedings requiring JCIT approval for regular Assessing Officer, deeming DDIT(Inv.) order as being without jurisdiction.
ITAT Chennai deleted additions made in search assessments (u/s 153A), ruling that Income Tax Department cannot make additions without specific, incriminating material seized during search. Following Supreme Courts ruling in Abhisar Buildwell, Tribunal held that search assessments are not fishing expeditions and must be strictly limited to evidence found post-search.
ITAT Delhi deleted a Rs.20.33 crore penalty under Section 271(1)(c), ruling that penalty notice was invalid because it failed to specify exact charge: concealment of income or furnishing inaccurate particulars. Ruling reinforces that an ambiguous, omnibus notice is a jurisdictional defect that vitiates penalty, even if assessment order records satisfaction.
