The article explains who can file appeals before the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, the orders that are appealable, applicable timelines, fees, stay provisions, and procedural requirements.
The article explains how offences such as wilful tax evasion, failure to file returns, non-payment of TDS/TCS, falsification of records, and non-compliance with tax notices can trigger prosecution under the Income-tax Act.
The Authority ruled that the product did not qualify as a separate chemically defined compound due to variable composition and fluctuating molecular characteristics, making Chapter 29 inapplicable.
The Authority ruled that the addition of calcium phosphate and the product’s intended use in food and beverage enrichment made it a protein-based preparation under Heading 2106 rather than an isolated soy protein under Heading 3504.
The Delhi ITAT upheld the addition of deemed house property income after finding that the assessee failed to support his claims with evidence. The Tribunal held that there was no reason to interfere with the CIT(A)’s factual findings.
The Tribunal held that the CIT(A) had incorrectly applied the principle relating to assessments of non-existent entities without examining the factual circumstances of the firm’s conversion into a proprietorship. The matter was remanded for further inquiry.
The Tribunal deleted the disallowance after finding no evidence that cash rent payments exceeded ₹10,000 on any single day. The ruling underscores that Section 40A(3) cannot be invoked without establishing an actual breach of the prescribed limit.
Assessing Officer acknowledged an inadvertent error in adding ₹46 lakh to the taxpayer’s income. The High Court remanded the matter for fresh assessment and directed consideration of all evidence, including the builder’s certificate.
The appellant claimed to be only a commission agent, but witness statements and records showed involvement in procurement, logistics, documentation, and receipt of export proceeds. The Tribunal held that these facts established participation in the export scheme and justified penalty.
ITAT sustained the adoption of fair market value under Section 50C after finding that seized cash represented on-money from property transactions. The Tribunal upheld the valuation determined through the DVO process.
