ITAT Hyderabad order, wherein Mohammed Rahimuddin successfully appeals the penalty u/s 271A due to estimation-based income addition.
In Ram Kishan Vs ITO case, ITAT Delhi ruled that no addition u/s 69A of Income Tax Act when income source was appropriately explained during assessment.
Read about dismissal of an appeal by ITAT Mumbai in case of BLPL Singapore Pvt Ltd Vs DCIT. Sssessee’s appeal against penalty order under Section 270A for non-disclosure of interest income was dismissed.
ITAT Kolkata held that depreciation is allowable on asset of the assessee if acquisition is claimed as application of income. Notably, after change in law in section 11(6), assessee has not claimed acquisition of property towards application of income while computing the total taxable income.
ITAT Amritsar held that rejection of application for registration u/s 12AB of the Income Tax Act unsustainable as there is no violation of section 13(1)(c) by paying remuneration to the full-time working trustee.
ITAT Delhi’s landmark judgement, which annulled late filing fee under Section 234E of the IT Act on grounds of limitation.
ITAT Amritsar’s ruling in Antony Madassery Vs DCIT case, discussing improper procedure in issuing income tax notices and deletion of penalties under sections 271(1)(b) and 272A(1)(b).
In ITO vs. Late Shri Chandi Ram, ITAT Jaipur upheld CIT(A)’s decision, recognizing arbitration and interest receipts from contracts executed in AY 1989-90 & 1990-91 as business income, taxable in AY 2012-13. Based on the jurisdictional High Court’s ruling, a net profit rate of 8.5% was applied, aligning with Supreme Court’s precedent on interest from delayed contract payments.
ITAT Mumbai held that order passed without considering the documents and without examining the correct residential status of the assessee is liable to be restore back for de novo adjudication.
ITAT Delhi held that sales cannot be added under section 68 of the Income Tax Act unless they are proved as bogus on the basis of some reliable evidences.
