ITAT Ahmedabad held that as the ownership of the land on which development rights were conferred remain vested with the landowners hence the assessee did not get the right over the income as per accrual accounting system as provided under the provisions of section 145 of the Act.
ITAT Delhi held that addition under section 68 of the Income Tax Act towards unexplained cash credit unsustainable as genuineness of transaction and creditworthiness of lender duly proved.
ITAT Surat held that seized jewellery within the permissible limit prescribed by CBDT Circular No 1916 dated 11.05.1994 couldn’t be treated as undisclosed jewellery. Accordingly, addition u/s 69A of the Income Tax Act liable to be deleted.
ITAT Kolkata held that reasons for reopening of the assessment recorded by an Authority who was not having territorial jurisdiction over the assessee is unsustainable in law and accordingly the entire reassessment proceeding is liable to be quashed.
ITAT Mumbai held that provision of Sec. 69A of the Income Tax Act cannot be applied in respect of cash deposited which have been duly recorded in the books of account and had already been declared income in the return of income filed by the assessee.
ITAT Delhi held that the receipts from offshore supply of rolling stock (train sets) cannot be taxable in India as the transfer of title over the goods has taken place outside India.
ITAT Mumbai held that as per section 92CA of the Income Tax Act, TPO can pass the order at any time before 60 days prior to the date on which period of limitation referred u/s 153 expires. TPO order passed after the prescribed time limit is non-est and barred by limitation.
ITAT Surat held that section 147 doesn’t allow the re-assessment of an income merely because of the fact that AO has change of opinion with regard to the interpretation of law differently on the facts that were well within his knowledge even at the time of assessment.
ITAT Kolkata held that AO failed to examine the agreement as composite agreement and hence non-examination of AO with that angle has caused prejudice to the interest of Revenue and hence CIT rightly set aside the assessment order by exercising powers under section 263 of the Income Tax Act.
ITAT Delhi held that addition based on incriminating material found during the search carried out of ‘some other person’ i.e. third person/ party and assessing the same by invoking provision of section 147 instead of section 153C is unsustainable.
