ITAT Ahmedabad held that a typographical error cannot be a reason to believe that the income of the assessee has escape assessment and hence initiation of proceedings under section 147 of the Income Tax Act is unsustainable.
ITAT Pune held that invocation of revisionary jurisdiction u/s. 263 of the Income Tax Act unjustified when AO examined the claim and took one of the plausible views and hence the assessment order cannot be termed as an “erroneous”.
In this article, we discuss case of Hasmukh Kanjibhai Tadhani Vs ITO (ITAT Surat) involving cash deposits during demonetization, with detailed analysis and outcome
Cash deposited during demonetization can’t be unexplained if taxpayer has a history of cash sales and no discrepancies found in books.
ITAT Chennai directs AO to accept 50% of cash deposits as sale proceeds and balance as unexplained money in J. Kalappa Naidu Sons’ case vs. ITO.
Discover ITAT Surat’s decision in Keshri Export vs. ITO case for Assessment Year 2017-18. Learn why rejection of entire books of account was considered unnecessary
In a significant ruling, ITAT Delhi states that no disallowance under Section 14A read with Rule 8D can be made if no exempt income was earned in previous year.
ITAT Chennai held that addition towards unexplained money u/s 69A of the Income Tax Act unjustified as assessee has filed necessary evidence to explain nature and source for cash deposits.
ITAT Delhi held that for the purpose of Section 153A/143(3) of the Income Tax Act, the assessment can be said to be ‘made’ only when the DIN is quoted on the order before it is signed. Order passed u/s 153A without first generating the DIN is invalid and bad-in-law.
ITAT Ahmedabad held that the provision of section 50C of Act cannot be made applicable to transaction of capital assets transferred by assessee to a partnership firm by way capital contribution. Such transaction falls under the provision of section 45(3) of the Income Tax Act.
