Read about the ITAT Ahmedabad’s decision in the case of Vivekkumar S Bhavsar vs ITO, where the matter was remanded back to the AO due to lack of cooperation from the assessee. A cost of Rs. 5000 was imposed on the assessee, payable to the Prime Minister National Relief Fund.
The ITAT Delhi orders a review of the Institute of Company Secretaries of India’s income tax exemption claim, sending the matter back for verification by the AO.
Ahmedabad ITAT rules in favor of Mehsana Urban Co-op. Bank Ltd., stating AO’s incorrect calculation isn’t failure to disclose, thus invalidating assessment reopening beyond 4 years.
In the case of SVT Wholesale Pvt. Ltd. Vs JCIT, the ITAT Bangalore evaluates the penalty imposed under Section 271D for violating Section 269SS of the Income Tax Act, 1961. Learn about the legal arguments, precedents, and the tribunal’s decision.
Read a detailed analysis of the case of DCIT vs. Flax Apparels Pvt. Ltd. where ITAT Ahmedabad ruled that Section 43B of the Income Tax Act, 1961 doesn’t apply when payment precedes the claim of expenditure.
Read the full text of the ITAT Chandigarh’s decision in the case of Manuj Jain HUF Vs PCIT. The assessment order was upheld, rejecting the Section 263 revision regarding demonetization cash deposits.
Ahmedabad ITAT ruled that vehicles used for business purposes, even if owned by directors, are eligible for depreciation. Case analysis of Mukesh Trends Lifestyle Limited Vs DCIT.
Chennai ITAT ruled that receiving a huge sale consideration in cash violates Sec 269SS, warranting penalty under Sec 271D. Case analysis of Nammalvar Lingusamy Vs ACIT.
Delhi ITAT ruled that to claim capital gains benefit under Sec 54, taxpayers must acquire a residential house within three years from the date of old house transfer. Analysis of Mohan Lal Jain case.
Raveendra M. Madrak Vs ITO (ITAT Bangalore): Taxpayer’s appeal delay condonation plea rejected due to lack of proof on CA’s advice and negligence. Full text here.
