The ITAT Delhi nullifies the penalty imposed under Section 271(1)(c) of the Income Tax Act on Meena Singhal, as the notice issued did not specify the particular charge.
ITAT Delhi has quashed the revision order in the C. M. Buildcon Pvt. Ltd. vs PCIT case, emphasizing the legitimacy of transactions through proper banking channels. Get insights from the case analysis
ITAT Delhi held that addition towards unexplained credits under section 68 of the Income Tax Act unsustainable as genuineness, identity and creditworthiness of the creditors proved.
ITAT Mumbai held that the issue of allowance of sales promotion expenses (including freebies) in the hands of Appellant was debatable and it cannot be said that allowance of deduction of sales promotion expenses by AO resulting in a mistake apparent on record. Thus, in absence of mistake apparent on record, order passed u/s 154 liable to be quashed.
An analysis of the landmark case Taranjeet Singh Alagh vs ITO, in which the ITAT Delhi provides key clarifications on the penalties under section 271B of the Income Tax Act relating to account audits and book maintenance.
ITAT Pune has set aside an NFAC order in the Kongnoli Sarva Seva Society Ltd vs ITO case. The ruling established that incorrect claims of deductions or expenses in ITR does not equate to the concealment of income
ITAT Delhi held that provision of management support services to various hotels in India doesn’t come under Article 12(4) of India -Singapore DTAA. Accordingly, addition unsustainable.
The Income Tax Appellate Tribunal (ITAT) in Delhi ruled in favor of the Haryana Rifle Association, deeming its activities not to be commercial. The tribunal found that the association was indeed eligible for registration under sections 12AA and 80G of the Income Tax Act.
ITAT Chennai held that once the assessee has discharged its primary onus of fulfilling the three ingredients of section 68 of the Income Tax Act, the further onus was on revenue to make further enquiry. However, since the onus lying on the revenue was not discharged, addition u/s 68 couldn’t be sustained.
ITAT Ahmedabad held that when application of income is more than receipts of year, excess application of income i.e., expenditure in the hands of the assessee can be carried forward to succeeding Year.
