ITAT Chennai held that both the conditions u/s 147 of the Income Tax Act needs to be satisfied for initiation of re-assessment after four years from the end of the relevant assessment year. Here, as assessee has disclosed fully and truly all the material facts, re-assessment proceedings couldn’t be sustained.
ITAT Jaipur held that once penal provisions under section 271AAB of the Income Tax Act are applied in case of search addition, invoking provision of section 115BBE is not in accordance with law and accordingly unsustainable.
ITAT Delhi held that if already filed return is to be treated for the purpose of re-assessment, then, filing of fresh return on receipt of notice under section 148 of the Income Tax Act is not required.
Microsoft Regional Sales Pte. Ltd. Vs ACIT (ITAT Delhi) While in the A.Y. 2018-19, the protective addition has been made in the hands of the assessee and the substantive addition has been made in the Mol Corporation during the A.Y. 2019-20, the substantive addition has been made in the case of assessee as the case […]
A. Manoharan Vs ITO (ITAT Bangalore) ITAT observe that the AO has made the addition under Section 69 of the Act of Rs.12,75,802/- for want of proper explanation of cash deposited during demonetisation period. The assessee tried to justify the same by submitted that the assessee had withdrawn cash from his Corporation Bank and Indian […]
Devinder Gupta & Sons (HUF) Vs CIT (ITAT Delhi) It is an admitted position that the assessee had taken loan from the lender in the earlier years, a part of which has been repaid during the year albeit in cash. The amount of loan has been consequently reduced. A confirmation whereof from the lender has […]
ITAT Mumbai held that assessee going through resolution process has failed to comply with various notices issued by lower authorities. Accordingly, it is directed to give one last opportunity to present their case before AO. Assessee is also directed to pay the cost for being delinquent before lower authorities.
ITAT Pune held that interest granted by the reference Court u/s. 28 of the Land Acquisition Act from the date of possession of land till the date of judgment of High Court is an accretion of the value of the land acquired and accordingly not taxable.
ITAT Chandigarh held that as additional evidence submitted are essential and critical for determination of issue under consideration, matter remanded back to ld. CIT(A).
ITAT Delhi held that in absence of any reasonable cause for taking cash loan (i.e. contravening provisions of section 269SS of the Income Tax Act), penalty under section 271D of the Income Tax Act duly leviable.
