ITAT Mumbai held that payments/compensation paid by developer is in the nature of hardship allowance / rehabilitation allowance is capital receipt and is not liable to tax.
ITAT Jaipur held that as defect notice issued u/s. 139(9) of the Income Tax Act is not in accordance with the law and hence the return of income filed by the assessee should be considered as valid return.
Discover how the ITAT Delhi ruled on penalty proceedings, emphasizing the importance of a precise notice specifying the offense under Section 271(1)(c).
ITAT Dehradun quashes reassessment proceedings in Uttarakhand Purv Kalyan Nigam Limited vs ITO case, citing lack of approval under section 151 of the Income Tax Act.
In the Rajendra G. Parekh vs ITO case, ITAT Mumbai restricts additions to 0.05% of gross total, questioning the handling of bank accounts and involvement in bogus business activities.
In a recent case, ITAT Guwahati ruled on ‘Income other than business/profession mismatch,’ setting aside the assessment order. Detailed analysis of the decision.
Explore the JCIT vs S.V. Balasubramani HUF case at ITAT Chennai. Learn why bonus payment disallowance under section 40A(3) of the Income Tax Act was challenged and the outcome of the appeal.
ITAT Chandigarh held that initiation of reassessment proceeding merely on the fact that AO has not carried out independent enquiries of confirmations from the creditors, without pointing out any deficiency or inaccuracy, cannot be a base to hold that order was erroneous in so far as prejudicial to the interest of revenue. Accordingly, reassessment unsustainable.
Explore the Bengal Tiger Line vs. DCIT case: ITAT Chennai rules in favor of the assessee, allowing benefits under India-Singapore DTAA for Vessel Handling Charges.
ITAT Delhi dismisses appeal, upholding taxability of interest received under Section 28 of Land Acquisition Act as income from other sources. Details of the case here.
