ITAT Chennai held that it is not open for the Assessing Officer to travel beyond the reasons for selection of the scrutiny for limited scrutiny.
ITAT Delhi held that as there is no gain of technical knowledge, experience or skill, the IT support service do not fall under the definition of FTS under Article 13 of the DTAA and hence TDS not deductible on the same.
ITAT Ahmedabad held that in an identical matter, jurisdictional High Court ruled the matter in favour of the assessee, however, later on Apex Court held otherwise. Accordingly, the issue was debatable do to which levy of penalty u/s 271(1)(c) of the Income Tax Act is unsustainable.
Held that in respect of concluded assessments, the earlier assessment completed should not be disturbed in the search assessments without existence of any incriminating material.
Cemetile Industries Vs ITO (ITAT Pune) These appeals by different assessees are directed against the confirmation of disallowance u/s.36(1)(va) of the Income-tax Act, 1961 (hereinafter also called ’the Act’) made in the Intimations issued u/s.143(1) of the Act or thereafter its confirmation in the respective rectification orders for the assessment years 2017-18 to 2020-21. Due […]
ITAT Kolkata held that invoking revisionary proceedings justified as AO failed to conduct the enquiry about the bogus transactions inspite of the report of the Investigation Wing containing the list of 84 companies found to be penny stock companies available in the Income Tax Portal.
ITAT Pune held that profits and gains arising from transfer of interest in Hydro Projects is income from business and not income under the head ‘short term capital gains’.
ITAT Pune held that information from the office of DIT (Inv.)-II is a tangible information enabling AO to form a belief that income has escaped assessment and hence proceedings of re-assessment justified.
ITAT Bangalore held that penalty under section 271F of the Income Tax Act leviable as assessee being a habitual defaulter filed income tax return for four years filed belatedly
Bablu Kumar Harinarayan Gupta Vs ITO (ITAT Pune) ITAT held that it is not fit case for levy of penalty u/s 271B merely because the appellant was unable to substantiate the submission that the appellant is only commission agent because there is no obligation on the part of the assessee to get the accounts audited […]
