ITAT Surat held that assessee is not required to get his books of accounts audited under section 44AB of the Income Tax Act as capital gain, short term or long term, doesn’t form part of turnover. Accordingly, penalty under section 271B not leviable.
ITAT Amritsar held that in case of non-cooperation during conduct of special audit under section 142(2A) of the Income Tax Act, the time limit to do the same can be extended at the end of the department.
Delve into the case of Society of Educational Assistance and Training Vs CIT (Exemptions), where ITAT Amritsar mandates reconsideration of a charitable trust registration rejection due to a lack of fair hearing opportunity.
ITAT Mumbai held that penalty u/s 271(1)(c) not leviable as mere making of a claim which is not sustainable in law by itself will not amount to furnishing of inaccurate particulars of income.
ITAT Delhi held that plausible approach adopted by AO cannot be labeled as erroneous. Hence, revisionary order under section 263 of the Income Tax Act is unsustainable in law.
ITAT Delhi held that Tax Residency Certificate (TRC) is statutorily the only evidence required to be eligible for the benefit under the DTAA. Accordingly, benefit of India-Mauritius DTAA duly available.
ITAT noted that the explanations provided by the assessee concerning the withdrawals, deposits, and utilization of cash over time were satisfactory. The Tribunal acknowledged the Indian socio-economic constructs where holding cash, especially in rural society, is common.
Delhi ITAT asserts that mere transactions through a DMAT account or selling shares on stock exchange don’t necessarily rebut Section 68 of Income Tax Act. Understand the full implications of this ruling with our comprehensive analysis.
ITAT Mumbai has directed AO to obtain the complete information and examine whether assessee has only leasehold right or complete rights over the property so that provisions of section 50C of the Income Tax Act are attracted.
ITAT Kolkata ruled in Kishorepur Paschimanchal SKUS Limited Vs ITO that delay in filing ROI does not deny a taxpayers deduction claims under Section 80P of IT Act 1961
